Dating the Five Books of Moses Through Synchronisms

Dating the Five Books of Moses
Abstract. The ‘documentary theory’, which suggests that the five books were created around 450 BCE
by combining four originally independent sources, known as the Jehovist, or J (c. 900 BCE), the Elohist, or
E (c. 800 BCE), the Deuteronomist, or D, (c. 600 BCE), and the Priestly source, or P (c. 500 BCE),
as set forth by J. Wellhausen (1895), was accepted by the majority of academic scholars for many years
without notable controversy. However, the ‘documentary theory’ sequence is only based on an evolutionary
theory popularized by German archaeologists during the World War II to struggle against Jewish and
Christian fundamentalism. In fact, no manuscript evidence of the J,E,P,D-documents or any of the other
supposed fragments have ever been discovered and there are no ancient Jewish commentaries that mention
any of these imaginary documents or their alleged unnamed authors. In addition, if these multiple sources
had actually existed before being amalgamated, they would have been assembled into an undefined order (if
authors were independent) as was the case, for example, for the scrolls of the minor prophets (and even the
four Gospels), however all the manuscripts of the Pentateuch have the same arrangement of chapters and its
five books are always in the same order. It is not randomly assembled episodes recitations but an editorial
choice made by a single author who thought that long text as a whole.
Critics of Israel Finkelstein against the Pentateuch, based on the absence of evidence which would be
evidence of the absence, are accepted by the majority of academic scholars. According to this prominent
archaeologist there would never have been 1) any biblical writing in the time of Moses (Dt 31:24), 2)
neither domesticated camels in the time of Abraham (Gn 12:6), 3) nor Philistines (Gn 21:34), 4) nor
Hittites (Gn 23:10), 5) nor Arameans (Dt 26:5), 6) nor Chaldeans (Gn 11:28), etc. However according
to history and chronology, all these claims are manifestly false. For example, the oldest epigraphs in paleo-
Hebrew are dated 1515 +/- 35 BCE and the ostracon of Tell Qaiyafa, dated prior to 1010 +/- 40
BCE refers to Leviticus 19:13. Moreover (see Dating the War of the Hyksos), Moses, according to
Manetho an Egyptian priest (c. 280 BCE), was the priest who ordained their polity and their laws [to the
Hyksos], his name Aauserre-Apopi; but that when he was gone over to these people, his name was changed,
and he was called Moses [Musa "son of Water"]. When this people or Hyksos were gone out of Egypt to
Jerusalem, Ahmose the king of Egypt, who drove them out, reigned afterward 25 years and 4 months
(Against Apion I:94, 250, 231, 265; II:16). Strabo, a Greek geographer and historian, wrote (c. 20
CE): An Egyptian priest named Moses, who managed a portion of the country called the Lower [Egypt],
being dissatisfied with the established institutions there, left it and came to Judea with a large body of people
who worshipped the Divinity (Geography XVI:2:35).
Four chronological markers (datable elements but insignificant at the time of writing) allow dating the
five books of Moses: 1) the rate of inflation in slave price, 2) the proportion of Amorite names with a
conjugated form in the imperfect, 3) the structure in patriarcal treaties and 4) the type of calendars used.
2 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY
The word ‘Pentateuch’ refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Tanakh, also
known as the Torah, or Old Testament, as it is known to Christians. These books are as
follows: 1) Genesis, 2) Exodus, 3) Leviticus, 4) Numbers and 5) Deuteronomy. According
to Richard Elliot Friedman1, biblical scholar and professor of Jewish studies at the
University Georgia: Moses is the major figure through most of these books, and early Jewish and
Christian tradition held that Moses himself wrote them, though nowhere in the Five Books of Moses
themselves does the text say that he was the author. But the tradition that one person, Moses, alone wrote
these books presented problems. People observed contradictions in the text. It would report events in a
particular order, and later it would say that those same events happened in a different order. It would say
that there were two of something, and elsewhere it would say that there were fourteen of that same thing. It
would say that the Moabites did something, and later it would say that it was the Midianites who did it. It
would describe Moses as going to a Tabernacle in a chapter before Moses builds the Tabernacle. Because
of these alleged contradictions the majority of modern scholars, whether biblical, textual, or
historical, no longer regard these books as having been written by Moses, they consider
that early and credulous traditions attributed the authorship of these five books to the
possibly mythological lawgiver of the Israelites, Moses.
Today the majority of academic scholars accept the theory that the Torah does not
have a single author, and that its composition took place over centuries2. From the late 19th
century there was a general consensus around the documentary hypothesis, which suggests
that the five books were created c. 450 BCE by combining four originally independent
sources, known as the Jehovist, or J (c. 900 BCE), the Elohist, or E (c. 800 BCE), the
Deuteronomist, or D, (c. 600 BCE), and the Priestly source, or P (c. 500 BCE)3. This
general agreement began to break down in the late 1970s, and today there are many
theories but no consensus, or even majority viewpoint. Variations of the documentary
hypothesis remain popular especially in America and Israel, and the identification of
distinctive Deuteronomistic and Priestly theologies and vocabularies remains widespread,
but they are used to form new approaches suggesting that the books were combined
gradually over time by the slow accumulation of "fragments" of text, or that a basic text
was "supplemented" by later authors/editors4. At the same time there has been a tendency
to bring the origins of the Pentateuch further forward in time, and the most recent
proposals place it in 5th century Judah under the Persian empire5.
Several variant views of documentary hypothesis exist, but perhaps the most
popular is that of Julius Wellhausen proposed in 1895. Wellhausen put dates to the alleged
four sources and none were earlier than around 900 BCE. As noted Old Testament
scholar, Gleason Archer remarks: Although Wellhausen contributed no innovations to speak of, he
restated the documentary theory with great skill and persuasiveness, supporting the JEDP sequence upon an
evolutionary basis6. Even though a great many scholars and much of the public have now
accepted this view, is it really true? First of all, one must be aware that these scholarly
1 R.E. FRIEDMAN – Who Wrote the Bible?
San Francisco 1997 Ed. Harper pp. 17-18.
2 J.J. MC DERMOTT – Reading the Pentateuch: a historical introduction
New Jersey 2002 Ed. Paulist Press. p. 21.

3 G. WENHAM –Pentateuchal Studies Today
in: Themelios 22.1 (October 1996) pp. 3–13.

4 J. VAN SETERS – The Pentateuch: a social-science commentary
2004 Ed. T&T Clark pp. 74–79.

5 G. KNOPPERS, B.M. LEVINSON – The Pentateuch as Torah: New Models for Understanding Its Promulgation and Acceptance
Winona Lake 2007 Ed. Eisenbrauns.

6 G. ARCHER -A Survey of Old Testament Introduction
Chicago 1994 Ed. Moody Press p. 95.

DATING THE FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES 3
attacks to discredit the authenticity of the Old Testament, made by some academics (for
most Egyptologists) as a means to eradicate religious obscurantism, are in fact the result of
an ideological propaganda initiated by the Nazi Party in 1933 to impose a vision of a world
governed solely by eugenics (the Brave New World). Despite the aversion of the Nazis
against culture, German scholars (nation with the most Nobel prize at that time) have been
able opportunely to provide their service to Nazi authorities showing them clear links
between the ideology of Plato's Republic and Hitler's Mein Kampf7. Two academic areas
have been particularly active in supporting the Nazi propaganda: 1) Doctors, in order to
teach the theory of evolution and its practical applications such as eugenics, and 2)
Archaeologists, in order to teach a new Indo-Aryan prehistory. Thus 69% of German
doctors were members of, at least, one of the Nazi organizations (Nazi Party, League of
Nazi doctors, SA or SS) and the number of doctors increased by 35% between 1939 and
19448. In 1931, there was only 1 rescue archaeological unit in Germany upgraded to 9 in
1939 and then to a staggering 14 in 1943, at the height of the war. The archaeological
profession was particularly prone to political engagement, and no less than 86% of all
registered archaeologists adhered to the Nazi party9 (the number of archaeologists has been
multiplied by 6 during this period)10. This figure is impressive when we consider that fewer
than 10% of the population held a Nazi membership card. As explained PhD Joseph
Goebbels in his diary, the purpose of all this academic teaching was to eradicate the 'Judeo-
Christian gangrene' from European people11. As no Nazi archaeologist were worried at
Nuremberg Trial, they were able to form a new generation of archaeologists according to
their former (Aryan) ideology. These postwar archaeologists (most Egyptologists) began
publishing articles, mainly from 198012, to prove that the text of the Old Testament should
be considered without historical value. It is to be noted that more these academics are close
to political power more their attack against the Bible are virulent and ideological:
! It is absurd on the one hand, taking the biblical text for a historical document, on the other hand
reversing the importance of protagonists: Israel is mentioned only once on a stele of Merneptah while the
word Egypt is used 680 times in the Bible (...) The references to Egypt in the Bible are mainly used to
feed the internal history of the Hebrews, giving a vague backdrop for some episodes, and are unrelated
with current history teaches13. Christiane Desroches Noblecourt (1913-2011), Egyptologist,
Emeritus Chief Curator of Egyptian Antiquities (Louvre) and former professor of
archeology at the Ecole du Louvre.
! As the history of unclean ones is devoid of any historical basis it is difficult to agree with Manetho and
Josephus that the forcibly expelling from Avaris by Pharaoh and his congeners is the same event as the
liberation of the Hebrews pulled out by Moses with God's help ... The gross invention of Egyptian
scribes, worthy of the trash, can not remain in the folder of historians of Bible times (...) The apologetical
travesty imagined by Josephus is not better than the libelous travesty of the Egyptian priest14. Jean
Yoyotte (1927-2009), Egyptologist, he was Chairholder of Egyptology at the Collège de
France and director of studies at the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes.
7 J. CHAPOUTOT –Le national-socialisme et l'Antiquité
Paris 2008 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 53,92,179,244-249.
8 L. H ASAPIS –Les expériences de la mort. L'expérimentation humaine menée par les allemands et les japonais entre 1931 et 1945
Lyon 2010 Éd. Université Claude Bernard (Thèse pour le grade de Docteur en médecine) pp. 19-20.
9 J.-P. LEGENDRE, L. OLIVIER, & B. SCHNITZLER –L'Archéologie Nazie en Europe de l'Ouest
in: Public Archaeology, Vol. 7, No. 2 (Summer 2008) pp. 135-138.

10 Archéologia n°442 mars 2007 pp. 42-57.
11 J. GOEBBELS –Journal 1933-1939
Paris 2007 Éd. Tallandier pp. 22,394,665,684.

12 J.K. H OFFMEIER – Israel in Egypt. The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition
New York 1996 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 3-5.

13 C. DESROCHES NOBLECOURT - Symboles de l'Égypte
Paris 2004 Éd. Desclée de Brouwer pp. 125-126.

14 J. YOYOTTE – En Égypte, le faux mystère des dynasties hyksos
in: Le monde de la Bible n°146 (novembre 2002) pp. 44-45.

! In general, no serious archaeologist believes today that the events described in the Book of Joshua have
any accurate historical basis. Archaeological surveys in the early 1990s, in particular, showed that the
Israelite culture emerged in the central hills of the country, in continuity with the Canaanite culture of
the previous period15. Pierre de Miroschedji, archaeologist, director of research at CNRS.
! The departure from Egypt, known as the Exodus, is an essential vicissitude of this story [Exodus
13:14] (...) We almost forget one fundamental fact: nothing in the present state of Egyptian literature,
more or less contemporary with these events, confirms this story, or even alluded, only fleetingly, to one of
the episodes where some characters are mentioned. Nothing!16 Alain Zivie, Egyptologist, Director
of Research at CNRS.
! Most historians take the biblical text of the conquest of Canaan for a pious legend, a reinterpretation of
ideological and theological origins of Israel (...) These cities are, according to the Bible, heavily fortified.
But archaeological excavations reveal otherwise. So today, excavations of Canaanite cities and reading of
tablets from Tell el-Amarna showed that the victories of Joshua took place only on paper. To conclude'll
go to these archaeologists: “There has been no mass exodus from Egypt. Canaan was not conquered by
violence17.” Richard Lebeau, Egyptologist, historian of religions in the ancient Near East.
! Modern archeology has shown that the concept of archives kept in Jerusalem with writings of the tenth
century, is an absurdity based on a biblical witness and not on factual evidence. Bible stories would rank
therefore among national mythologies, and would have no more historical foundation that Homeric saga
of Ulysses, or that of Aeneas, founder of Rome, sung by Virgil18. Israel Finkelstein, Israeli
archaeologist, Director of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University, author of
the famous book The Bible Unearthed.
! How should ultimately consider the source that is the biblical text to serve as a gateway for talking
about people of the Bible? (...) There are so many layers of myths, they should not be taken for historical
narratives. The Exodus, episode presented in history books of college as a real historic event, provides a
good illustration. According to the Bible (...) this is the long journey of the Hebrews from Egypt and
Canaan which is called the Exodus. However, it is highly unlikely that such an event ever took place.
The first reason to doubt results from the considerable chronological gap between the time of writing from
books that mention it and the supposed date of the event, clearly located in a mythical past. The second
reason is the absence of any explicit data in the biblical text to place Exodus in the time and to follow it
in space, so the name of the Pharaoh is not given. The third reason is the silence of the Egyptian sources.
A final argument is the absence of any reference to the Exodus in the oldest strata of the Bible19.
Christian Robin, Director of the Laboratory of ancient Semitic Studies (Collège de
France Paris IV Sorbonne), member of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres.
! The biblical writers and editors had some genuine sources, but they did not hesitate to manipulate them.
They did this not only with exaggerations and embellishments, but also with additions and even outright
inventions, in order to make the stories serve their own ideological agenda. In this regard, they were like
most ancient historians. Nevertheless, they still need not be regarded as charlatans, even though their
view of history was naive. They, too, thought that they were telling the operative truth — that is, they
were simply writing well-intentioned propaganda. This may be called “historicized myth,” and that is
15 P. DE MIROSCHEDJI – Les archéologues réécrivent la Bible
in: La Recherche n°391 (novembre 2005) p. 32.
16 A. ZIVIE – Les Hébreux en Egypte: réalités et fantasmes
in: Historia n°698 (février 2005) p. 59.

17 R. LEBEAU – La Terre promise était acquise
in: Historia n°698 (février 2005) pp. 64, 65.

R. LEBEAU – L'Exode une fiction théologique
in: Histoire Antique n°41 (février 2009) p. 79.
18 I. FINKELSTEIN – Le grand roi? Rien qu'un potentat local

I. FINKELSTEIN, N.A. SILBERMAN - La Bible dévoilée
Paris 2002 Éd. Bayard pp. 51-53.
19 C. ROBIN – Les peuples de la Bible quelle(s) lecture(s) ?
in: Les Cahiers de Science&Vie n°89 (octobre 2005) pp. 6-8.

how much of modem, liberal, critical scholarship regards the Hebrew Bible. Nevertheless, even
propaganda and myth, like caricature, must necessarily contain some objective truths, lest they be
completely unbelievable and thus ineffective (...) Rather than attempt to defend the factual historicity of
the Exodus traditions, I suggest that we must understand the Exodus story precisely as a myth,
specifically as a “metaphor for liberation”. William G. Dever, American archaeologist
(University of Arizona), specialist and defender (sic) of the history of biblical Israel20.
! Stories and history (...) It would be absurd requesting the rigor that would use a modern historian (...),
although we can not specify the contours in the mythical garment that has been given, in accordance with
the mentality of the time and the environment (...) For the date of the Exodus, we can not rely on
chronological indications of 1 K 6:1 and Jg 11:26, which are secondary and derived from artificial
computations (...) Certainly neither the apostles nor other evangelical preachers and storytellers have tried
to make « history » in the technical sense of the word, their purpose was less profane and more
theological. Jerusalem Bible (Paris 1986 Ed. Cerf pp. 27, 1410), which is the official Bible
of the Catholic world.
An objective reader should note that most reasons put forward by these prestigious
scholars are ideological, not based on any verifiable factual data: absurd, no serious archaeologist
believes that the events described in the book of Joshua; worthy of the garbage, fundamental fact: nothing,
pious legend, there was no mass exodus from Egypt; nonsense based on a biblical witness; very type of myth,
history does not support the amazing and miraculous story of Exodus, etc. Some of these scholars, in
order to prove their claims, quote the work of the archaeologist Finkelstein explaining21:
The main problem was that the scholars who accepted the biblical accounts as reliable mistakenly believed
that the patriarchal age must be seen, one way or the other, as the earliest phase in a sequential history of
Israel. Some Telltale Anachronisms: The critical textual scholars who had identified distinct sources
underlying the text of Genesis insisted that the patriarchal narratives were put into writing at a relatively
late date, at the time of the monarchy (tenth-eighth centuries BCE) or even later, in exilic and post-exilic
days (sixth-fifth centuries BCE). The German biblical scholar Julius Wellhausen argued that the stories of
the patriarchs in both the J and E documents reflected the concerns of the later Israelite monarchy, which
were projected onto the lives of legendary fathers in a largely mythical past. The biblical stories should thus
be regarded as a national mythology with no more historical basis than the Homeric saga of Odysseuss
travels or Virgil's saga of Aeneas's founding of Rome. In more recent decades, the American biblical
scholars John Van Seters and Thomas Thompson further challenged the supposed archaeological evidence
for the historical patriarchs in the second millennium BCE. They argued that even if the later texts contained
some early traditions, the selection and arrangement of stories expressed a clear message by the biblical
editors at the time of compilation, rather than preserving a reliable historical account. But when did that
compilation take place? The biblical text reveals some clear clues that can narrow down the time of its final
composition. Take the repeated mention of camels, for instance. The stories of the patriarchs are packed
with camels, usually herds of camels; but as in the story of Joseph's sale by his brothers into slavery (Genesis
37:25), camels are also described as beasts of burden used in caravan trade. We now know through
archaeological research that camels were not domesticaced as beasts of burden earlier than the late second
millennium and were not widely used in that capacity in the ancient Near East until well after 1000 BCE.
And an even more telling detail —the camel caravan carrying "gum, balm, and myrrh," in the Joseph
story— reveals an obvious familiarity with the main produces of the lucrative Arabian trade that flourished
under the supervision of the Assyrian empire in the eighth-seventh centuries BCE. Then there is the issue of
the Philistines. We hear of them in connection with Isaac's encounter with "Abimelech, king of the
Philistines," at the city of Gerar (Genesis 26:1). The Philistines, a group of migrants from the Aegean or
eastern Mediterranean, had not established their settlements along the coastal plain of Canaan until
20 W.G. DEVER – Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From?
Grand Rapids 2003 Ed. Eerdmans Publishing pp. 226,233.
21 I. FINKELSTEIN, N.A. SILBERMAN -The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Isreal and the Origin of Sacred Texts
New York 2001 Ed. The Free Press pp. 36-38.

sometime after 1200 BCE. Their cities prospered in the eleventh and tenth centuries and continued to
dominate the area well into the Assyrian period. The mention of Gerar as a Philistine city in the narratives
of Isaac and the mention of the city (without the Philistine attribution) in the stories of Abraham (Genesis
20:1) suggest that it had a special importance or at least was widely known at the time of the composition of
the patriarchal narratives. Gerar is today identified with Tel Haror northwest of Beersheba, and
excavations there have shown that in the Iron Age I —the early phase of Philistine history— it was no
more than a small, quite insignificant village. But by the late eighth and seventh century BCE, it had
become a strong, heavily fortified Assyrian administrative stronghold in the south, an obvious landmark.
Were these incongruous details merely late insertions into early traditions or were they indications that both
the details and the narrative were late? Many scholars —particularly those who supported the idea of the
"historical" patriarchs —considered them to be incidental details. But as Thomas Thompson put it as early
as the 1970s, the specific references in the text to cities, neighboring peoples, and familiar places are precisely
those aspects that distinguish the patriarchal stories from completely mythical folk-tales. They are crucially
important for identifying the date and message of the text. In other words, the "anachronisms" are far more
important for dating and understanding the meaning and historical context of the stories of the patriarchs
than the search for ancient bedouin or mathematical calculations of the patriarchs' ages and genealogies. So
the combination of camels, Arabian goods, Philistines, and Gerar—as well as other places and nations
mentioned in the patriarchal stories in Genesis —are highly significant. All the clues point to a time of
composition many centuries after the time in which the Bible reports the lives of the patriarchs took place.
These and other anachronisms suggest an intensive period of writing the patriarchal narratives in the eighth
and seventh centuries BCE. According to Finkelstein, Moses have little or nothing to do with
the writing of the book of the Pentateuch.
Critics of Finkelstein against the Pentateuch are all based on an absence of evidence
that would be evidence of the absence: 1) according to the documentary hypothesis there
would never have been any biblical writing in the time of Moses and 2) according to the
assumptions of archeology there would have been neither camels in the time of Abraham, 3)
nor Philistines. According to history and chronology, all these claims are manifestly false.
First, several lines of evidence should lead us to reject the documentary hypothesis as a
fabrication of unbelievers. Attacks against the Old Testament involve the New Testament
because the words of Jesus are: you have placed your hopes on Moses, and Moses will be the one who
accuses you. If you really believed him you would believe me too, since it was about me that he was writing;
but if you will not believe what he wrote, how can you believe what I say (John 5:45-47).
REASONS TO REJECT THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS

There are many reasons to reject this skeptical attack on the Bible. First, consider
what the Bible itself says about the authorship of the Pentateuch. Biblical witness to Mosaic
authorship: The chart below shows that the Pentateuch states that Moses wrote these
books: Exodus 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Numbers 33:1–2; Deuteronomy 31:9–11. In his rejection
of Mosaic authorship, Wellhausen nowhere discussed this biblical evidence. It is easy to
deny Mosaic authorship, if one ignores the evidence for it. But that is not honest
scholarship. We also have the witness of the rest of the Old Testament: Joshua 1:8; 8:31–
32; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; 21:8; Ezra 6:18; Nehemiah 13:1; Daniel 9:11–13; Malachi 4:4.
The New Testament is also clear in its testimony: Matthew 19:8; John 5:45–47; 7:19; Acts
3:22; Romans 10:5; Mark 12:26. The divisions of the Old Testament were clearly in place in
the Jewish mind long before the time of Christ, namely, the Law of Moses (first 5 books of
the OT), the Prophets (the historical and prophetic books) and the Writings (the poetic
books of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, etc.). So when Jesus referred to the Law of Moses, His
Jewish listeners knew exactly to what He was referring.
Fallacious reasoning of the Skeptics:

1. They assumed that the Bible is not a supernatural revelation from God, what implicitly
reveals that they are Deistic or atheistic in their thinking. This view is faulty because not
only the inexistence of God can not be proven but in this case all historical records of
past would be dismissed because they all involve god(s)' intervention. For example, all
pharaohs were believed to be "sons of the Sun" (Ra-mes) generated by Horus, but it is
obvious that this (erroneous) belief does not affect the existence of pharaohs.
2. Based on evolutionary ideas, they assumed that the art of writing was virtually unknown
in Israel prior to the establishment of the Davidic monarchy; therefore there could have
been no written records going back to the time of Moses. This claim not only attacks
the intelligence of the ancient Israelites, but also the Egyptians who trained Moses.
Were the Egyptians incapable of teaching Moses how to read and write? Since the time
the documentary hypothesis was first proposed, archaeologists have discovered scores of
written records pre-dating the time of Moses. It is hard to believe that Israel's ancient
neighbors knew how to write, but the Jews could not. Their subjective bias led them to
illegitimately assume that any biblical statement was unreliable until proven reliable
(though they would not do this with any other ancient or modern text) and when they
found any disagreement between the Bible and ancient pagan literature, the latter was
automatically given preference and trusted as a historical witness. The former violates
the well-accepted concept known as Aristotle's dictum, which advises that the benefit of
the doubt should be given to the document itself, rather than the critic. In other words,
the Bible (or any other book) should be considered innocent until proven guilty, or
reliable until its unreliability is compellingly demonstrated.
3. Liberal Bible scholars allegedly based their theories on evidence from the Biblical text
and yet they evaded the Biblical evidence that refutes their theories. Theirs was a "pick
and choose" approach to studying the Bible, which is hardly honest scholarship in
pursuit of truth. They arbitrarily assumed that the Hebrew authors were different from
all other writers in history — that the Hebrews were incapable of using more than one
name for God, or more than one writing style regardless of the subject matter, or more
than one of several possible synonyms for a single idea. Although many examples have
been found of an ancient Semitic author using repetition and duplication in his narrative
technique, skeptical scholars assume that when Hebrew authors did this, it is compelling
evidence of multiple authorship of the biblical text. The skeptics erroneously assumed,
without any other ancient Hebrew literature to compare with the biblical text, that they
could, with scientific reliability, establish the date of the composition of each book of
the Bible. To date, no manuscript evidence of the J-document, E-document, P-
document, D-document, or any of the other supposed fragments have ever been
discovered. And there are no ancient Jewish commentaries that mention any of these
imaginary documents or their alleged unnamed authors. All the manuscript evidence we
have is for the first five books of the Bible just as we have them today. This is
confirmed by the singular Jewish testimony (until the last few centuries) that these
books are the writings of Moses. The documentary hypothesis developed by Julius
Wellhausen (1844-1918) is a literary critic in disguise22 (called source criticism), which is
in fact contradicted by linguistic analysis23. This fanciful hypothesis was proposed first
by physician Jean Astruc (1685-1766) who postulated that the Pentateuch came from 2
(not 4) sources: a Jehovist document (J) and an Elohist document (E) because God had
22 P. GUILLEMETTE, M. BRISEBOIS – introduction aux méthodes historico-critiques
Québec 1987 Éd. Fides pp. 232-238.
23 Y.T. RADDAY, H. SHORE – Genesis: An Authorship Study in Computer-assisted Statistical Linguistics
in: Analecta Biblica 103 (1985) Ed. Biblical Institute Press.

two names: Jehovah and Elohim. It was his evidence that two authors (anonymous) had
produced these two texts (at an unspecified date), which were then cleverly merged by a
third author (also anonymous and date unknown). Wellhausen improved this hypothesis
and taught his students that everything about the Temple had been written either by the
priests, the priestly document (P), or at Jerusalem, the Deuteronomist document (D).
This hypothesis is untenable (it resembles children's stories that begin with "once upon
a time in a faraway land") since ancient authors never mention one of these missing
links (those opposed to Judaism and Christianity, using challenged Apocrypha, never
mentioned this "Do it yourself Pentateuch"). In addition, if the fragmentation of the
text in four sources is consistent with Darwinian evolutionism, it is contrary to common
sense. Indeed, why an author would use only one name for God? If this hypothesis was
correct, we should have a variety of sources: a Mercifulist document (M) when God is
called Merciful, Olamiste (O) when God is called Olam "Eternal", Elyoniste (El) when
God is called Elyon "Most High", Shaddayiste (S) when God is called Shadday
"Almighty", etc. In addition, it is easy to check the fallacy of this hypothesis. Indeed, if
these multiple sources (J, E, P and D) had actually existed before being amalgamated,
they would have been assembled into an undefined order (if authors were independent)
as was the case, for example, for the scrolls of the minor prophets (and even the four
Gospels), however all the manuscripts of the Pentateuch have the same arrangement of
chapters and its five books are always in the same order. This logical argument also
applies to the work of Homer24 because in the same way it is not randomly assembled
episodes recitations, but an editorial choice made by a single author who thought that
long poem as a whole (why not call it Homer since tradition is unanimous?). The
Pentateuch had to be written by someone, why refusing to call it Moses? In fact, alleged
anachronisms invoked to discredit the Pentateuch are they real?
ABRAHAM'S CAMELS ARE THEY ANACHRONISTIC?
Several studies mention relics, texts and animal remains that support domestication
of the camel in Arabia25 starting prior 2000 BCE. Many petroglyphs26 occurring on rocks in
Saudi confirm27 this as the presence of camel bones dating to late 3rd millennium28.
Apart from these stone engravings, the Bedouins (mainly passing on the Incense
Route) have apparently left no text. The current opinion is that this animal was introduced
into Syria by the Arameans in the late 2nd millennium and gained importance in the Neo-
Assyrian both as pack and riding animals used for war in particular by the Bedouins. The
Arab king Gindibu had sent 10,000 men camel at the Battle of Karkar won in 853 BCE by
Shalmaneser III. In 652 BCE, !ama"-"um-ukîn king of Babylon, received reinforcement of
24 A. SCHNAPP-GOURBEILLON – Aux origines de la Grèce
Paris 2002 Éd. Les Belles Lettres pp. 285-287.
25 S. AD SAUD ABDULLAH - The Domestication of Camels and Inland Trading Routes in Arabia
in: Atlas. The Journal of Saudi Arabian Archaeology Vol. 14, Riyadh 1996 pp. 129-131.
26 E. ANATI - Rock-Art in Central Arabia Vol. 1
1968 Louvain Ed. Institut Orientaliste pp. 109-111.

27 E. ANATI - Rock-Art in Central Arabia Vol. 4
1974 Louvain Ed. Institut Orientaliste pp. 128, 234.

28 J. ZARINS - Camel
in: The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York 1992 Ed. Doubleday pp. 824-826.
Arab troops mounted on camels to face Ashurbanipal. Such troops are also represented on
the bas-reliefs from Ashurbanipal's palace. In fact, the petroglyphs of camels are quite
common, but the main difficulty is dating them because stones can not be dated by the
C14. There are really only two ways that allow them to date:
! The study of the immediate environment of petroglyphs, as typical pottery or wooden
object datable by carbon-14 for example, gives an approximate date. Studies of rock art
Bir Hima (Syrian Djezireh), for example, have revealed numerous camels petroglyphs
(unfortunately not yet published)29 dating back prior 1500 BCE30.
! Sometimes, exceptionally, some petroglyphs are accompanied by a text containing the
names of characters that can be located in time. This is the case of this representation
(below) discovered in the desert east of Edfu31 which the inscription reads: The guide of
good ways, pilot Imai. The name Imai (’Im3i) is uncommon and appears only during the
reign of Pepi II (2179-2121), which situated the inscription to 2150-2100.
Eastern Edfu (2150-2100 BCE) Assuan (2200-2100 BCE)
Outside the Bedouin, other civilizations had little interest in this animal. The
Sumerians and the Egyptians, for example, considered the camel (Bactrian camel was
ignored in Egypt) as an exotic pet, that is still the case today in most countries. In addition,
despite some animals have known to Egyptians, such as cats and hens, they have not been
represented on their monuments. However, there remain some vestiges32 revealed by the
excavations in Egypt. Thus, a braided cord of camel hair, dated around 2500 BCE, was
exhumed at Pi-Ramesses in the Fayum. A camel carrying a man on his back is shown in a
terracotta tablet found at Gurna33 (near Luxor) and a vase-shaped kneeling camel was
exhumed from a Ist dynasty tomb (c. 2800-2700 BCE) at Abusir el-Meleq34 (10 kilometers
south of Cairo). In Wadi Nasib (in Sinai), a caravan of camels appears with one of which is
pulled by a man appears on the rocks35. A statuette in the shape of a camel carrying
amphorae has been found in Rifeh. These accidental archaeological discoveries show that if
Pharaonic Egypt did not mention the camel she was not ignorant of it.
29 http://ancient-cultures.info/attachments/File/RR_article_petroglyphs.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bir_Hima_Rock_Petroglyphs_and_Inscriptions#cite_ref-Culture_6-1
30 P.N. PEREGRINE, M. EMBER - Encyclopedia of Prehistory: Volume 8: South and Southwest Asia
USA 2002 Ed. Human Relations Area Files, Inc p. 257.

31 ZBYNEK ZABA - The Rock Inscriptions of Lower Nubia
Prague 1974 Ed. Tzechoslovak Institute of Egyptology pp. 237, 238, Fig. 409 CCXXIX.
R.D. ROTHE, W.K. MILLER, G.R. RAPP - Pharaonic Inscriptions from the Southern Eastern Desert of Egypt
USA 2008 Ed. Eisenbrauns, p. 132.
32 K.A. KITCHEN - On the Reliability of the Old Testament
Cambridge 2003 Ed. W.B. Eerdmans pp. 338, 339, 640.

33 V.L. KEIMER – Bemerkungen und lesefrüchte zur altägyptischen naturgeschichte
in: Kêmi Vol. II (1929) pp. 84-106, pl. IV.

34 M.W. MIKESELL – Notes on the Dispersal of the Dromedary
in: Southwestern Journal of Anthropology Vol. 11:3 (1955) pp. 231-245.

35 RANDALL W. YOUNKER - Late Bronze Age Camel Petroglyphs in the Wadi Nasib, Sinai
in: Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin 42 (1997) pp. 47-54.

Gurna (Iran, 2800-2700 BCE) Abusir el-Meleq (Egypt, 2800-2700 BCE)
Wadi Nasib (Sinaï, c. 1500 BCE) Rifeh (Egypt, 1300-1200 BCE)
As most of these objects were found near the Egyptian deserts, their former
owners should be Bedouins rather than Egyptians. Apart from Egypt, camels appear near
cities36 that fell all along the "Incense Route" linking the Persian Gulf to Egypt along the
Mediterranean Sea. These camels are represented on seals37, bitumen stela38 (Susa), silver
vases39 (Gonur) or by a container40 (Berlin Egyptian Museum) from Abusir el-Meleq:
Byblos (c. 2000 BCE) Ur (1900-1700 BCE)
Susa (c. 2300 BCE) Seal from Central Asia (c. 2000 BCE)
36 R.W. BULLIET - The Camel and the Wheel
Cambridge Massachusetts 1975 Ed. Harvard University Press pp. 57-71.
37 J. ARUZ -Art of the First Cities. The Third Millenium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus
New York 2003 Ed. The Metropolitan Museum of Art pp. 374-375.
38 E. VILLENEUVE - Archéologie: Bitume au natuel
2002, in: Le monde de la Bible n°145 pp. 57-59.

39 D. POTTS – Puzur-In"u"inak and the Oxus Civilizations
in: Zeitschrift für Assyriologie n°98 (2008) pp. 165-194.

40 M. RIPINSKY -The Camel in Dynastic Egypt, in: Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 71 (1985), pp. 134-141.
J.P. FREE -Abraham’s Camels, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies 3:3 (Jul. 1944), pp. 187-193.
Gonur. Iranian Vase (deployed) in silver (2100-2000 BCE)
Syrian seal (1800-1400 BCE) Bactrian camel statue (2300-1700 BCE)
It has also been found in Ur41, a city from which Abraham left, a small kneeling
camel in gold. This jewellery was part of a necklace dated Ur III Dynasty (c. 2000 BCE)
similar to a Bactrian camel statue42. All these discoveries prove that the domestication of
camels (deducted from men riding or guiding camels and from jars shape) dates back to
2000 BCE43, at least in Arabia. Even if the texts mentioning this domestication are rare,
they are not nonexistent. An Old Babylonian text found at Nippur, dated 2000-1700 BCE,
explicitly refers to camel milk44 (how to get milk from a wild animal?). In addition,
grammatical analysis would rank camels among domestic animals because the last radical –b
would be an original determinant for wild animals (eg kaleb "dog") while the determinant –
l/r (eg gamal) would be for domestic animals45. The camel was actually called AM.SI
46
!AR.RA.AN "pachyderm of Harran." Always at Nippur, a Sumerian list of exotic animals ,
dating back to Ancient Babylonian (1900-1500), ranks camel with tiger and Asian elephant.
A text found at Alalakh, dated between 1800 and 1700 BCE, evokes fodder for camels47
(the reading [AN!E]-GAM-MAL "camel" is discussed). The word "camel" is derived from the
Akkadian gammalu, corresponding to Sumerian [AN!E]-GAM-MAL. The meaning of another
Sumerian word to describe the camel AN!E-A-AB-BA "donkey of the sea" (ibilu in Akkadian)
illuminates the role of this animal in this early period. The summary ranking of camel by
the Sumerians in the category of donkey shows that this exotic animal was not well known
and the surprising mention "of the sea" is an indirect confirmation of its Arabic origin.
Indeed, the camels were mostly used by Arab caravaneers (without camels, deserts of
North Africa would have been uninhabitable) especially for selling incense (Isaiah 60:6). As
41 E.M. BLAIKLOCK R.K. HARRISON - The New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology
Michigan 1983 Ed. Zondervan Publishing House pp. 115-116.
42 http://www.metmuseum.org/collections/search-the-collections/324256 (Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex)
43 H. EPSTEIN –Le dromadaire dans l'Ancien Orient
in: Revue d'histoire des sciences et de leurs applications n°7 (1954) Presses Universitaires de France pp. 247-268.
44 The Assyrian Dictionary Vol. 7
Chicago 1960 Ed. The Oriental Institute p. 2.

45 J.-C. H AELEWYCK –Grammaire comparée des langues sémitiques
in: Langues et cultures anciennes 7, 2007 Bruxelles, Éd. Safran p. 146.

46 M. CIVIL - "Adamdun", the Hippopotamus, and the Crocodile
in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 50 (1998) p. 11.

47 A. GOETZE - Remarks on the Ration Lists from Alalakh VII
in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 13. New Haven 1959 pp. 29, 37.
W.G. L AMBERT - The Domesticated Camel in the Second Millenium
in: BASOR 160 (dec. 1960) pp. 42-43.
these traders borrowed an "Incense Route" linking the Persian Gulf to Egypt passing along
the Mediterranean Sea (2Chronicles 20:2), hence its later name Via Maris48 "Way of the
Sea" quoted in Isaiah 8:23. A letter from Assyrian king Shamshi-Adad I demonstrates the
use of this route by his army49 about 1700 BCE, and the sale of Joseph to Ishmaelite
merchants illustrates the role of this ancient trade route (Genesis 37:25). From the 11th
century BCE Assyrian texts mentioning domesticated camels as the one of king Assur-bel-
kala (1073-1056) are more numerous50. Archaeological discoveries51 have thus confirmed an
early domestication of camel in Arabia52, even though its development was very slow.
The reading of the biblical account sometimes gives the impression that camels
were used extensively in Mesopotamia from the patriarchal period, but this is not the case.
Some points can be checked. Abraham had camels only after he left Haran and gone
through the Negeb (Genesis 12:9,16). The owners of these animals were Bedouin Arabs
(Genesis 32:3,15; Judges 6:3,5) for most. Possession of camels was a sign of wealth
especially for Arab peoples (Job 1:3) as the Midianites and Edomites. In fact, the biblical
data on camels are consistent with archaeological discoveries. Camel owners are essentially
in Arabia. Job, who mentions caravans of Tema (Job 6:19), was an Oriental. The Queen of
Sheba, arriving with her camels, was staying in the south of Arabia (2Chronicles 9:1).
Abraham became an owner of camels after he left Harran (Genesis 12:5) his host city. This
rich owner, from the prosperous city of Ur, made a wise choice in acquiring a caravan of
48 É. STERN - La Via Maris in: Les routes du Proche-Orient. Des séjours d'Abraham aux caravanes de l'encens
Paris 2000 Éd. Desclée de Brouwer pp. 58-65.
49 J.C. MARGUERON, L. PFIRSCH - Le Proche-Orient et l'Égypte antique
Paris 2005 Éd. Hachette Supérieur p. 199.

50 A. KUHRT - The Exploitation of the Camel in the Neo-Assyrian Empire
in: Studies on Ancient Egypt London 1999 Ed. The Egypt Exploration Society pp. 179-184.
51 JOHN J. DAVIS -The Camel In Biblical Narratives,
in: A Tribute To Gleason Archer. Chicago 1986, Ed. Moody Press

A.E. DAY R.K HARRISON G.W. BROMILEY - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 1
1979 Grand Rapids: Eerdmans: pp. 583-584.
D.J. WISEMAN F.E. GAEBELEIN - Archaeology & The Old Testament
in: Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 1, 1979 Grand Rapids: Zondervan p. 316.
J.P. FREE - Abraham's Camels
in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 3, 1944, pp. 187-93.
52 I. KÖHLER-ROLLEFSON - Camels and Camel Pastoralism in Arabia
in: Biblical Archaeologist 56 (1993) pp. 180-188.

camels, probably from Arab traders, as these animals are very well suited for nomadic life.
Abraham, although living in tents is not presented as a Bedouin, but as a prestigious chef, a
sedentarized livestock farmer, sometimes moving due to external events.
These elements coming from archaeology are usually deliberately ignored by most
Egyptologists. In fact many experts still referring to statements by Albright of 1940, for
who camels in the Bible were anachronistic, persisting to ignore archaeological evidence of
domestication around 2000 BCE53. Professor E. Lipinski54, in contrast, states: Camel seems to
have been domesticated in Arabia since the 3rd millennium BCE. In South Arabiche he is called gml,
certainly the same as "amal in classical Arabic, g#moul in Coptic, and as the plural GIM-L-N, or
GM-IL of Numidian inscriptions of the 2nd century BCE ("Bactrian camels" or maybe "cameleers"). The
Sumerian pseudo-ideogram and the Akkadian word are clearly borrowings from former Arabic appeared in
parts of the Persian Gulf. The determinative AN!E indicates that it is a pack animal, as donkey. The
repetition of m in a loan word does not seem significant, in the same way Hebrew double the l in plural for
no apparent reason. The shape AN!E-GAM without the sign MAL is not certified. The original structure
of the word, before the domestication of camel, which has found traces in Tunisia from the 4th millennium
BCE, however, had a monosyllabic basis: gam or kam. It is found in Egypt (qm3), Paleo-Nubian
(kam), Coptic (qam) and even as a-l+!em (plural i-le!m-an) in the modern Berber dialects. It is
impossible to specify the period to which the suffix –al was added to the base word, but its employment with
the names of domesticated animals suggests to date the form gml in the 3rd millennium BCE55.
Given the abundance of evidence regarding the domestication of camel to 2000
BCE, the frequent reference to Finkelstein claiming that this domestication began around
1000 BCE (main argument used to discredit the Bible) is indicative of the propensity to
believe media disinformation. Claiming that the camels of Abraham are anachronistic, as
do most Egyptologists, reflects a serious disregard of archaeological and linguistic data.
This recurring criticism of anachronism is often taken up by conformism inside academia.
The "unveiling anachronisms" by Finkelstein is in fact an atheist propaganda. This
misinformation is deliberate since Finkelstein knows his subject (and numerous studies on
the domestication of camel are also available in most major libraries). Another anachronism
is frequently raised concerning Abraham: a too early Philistine presence in Palestine.
PHILISTINES IN THE TIME OF ABRAHAM ARE THEY ANACHRONISTIC?

The Philistines (peli"ti) are mentioned for the first time in the Great inscription of
Ramses III, year 8 (1185 BCE), among the list of Sea Peoples. Amenemope's Onomasticon
(c. 1100 BCE) then locates the Philistines (p-w-l-ÿ-s3-ti) in Ahsdod, Ashkelon, Gaza, and
[Ekron?]. This massive influx of Philistines in the southern coastal plain
of the Levant is mentioned 23 years before they annexed the land of
Israel (on 1162-1122 BCE). According to Justinus (Philippics Histories
XVIII:3:5), the Sidonians had already pushed back the Philistine ships
one year prior the Trojan War (1186 BCE). On the walls of Medinet
Habu pirates from the Sea Peoples appear with plumed helmets while a
Philistine (p-w-l-s3-ti) chief is wearing a kind of beret56 (opposite figure).
Emergence of the Philistines in Palestine57 is concomitant in Israelite
and Egyptian chronologies. However, this synchronism is problematic
53 S.A. ROSEN, B.A. SAIDEL – The Camel and the Tent: An Exploration of Technological Change among Early Pastoralists
in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 69:1 (2010) pp. 74-76.
54 Professor of Eastern history and biblical studies
55 E. LIPINSKI – Itineraria Phoenicia
in: Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 127 (2004) Éd. Peeters pp. 205-212.
56 N.K. SANDARS – Les peuples de la mer
Paris 1978 Éd. France-Empire pp. 117-138, 164-170

57 This name means "land of the Philistines".
because, according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 2:23, Jeremiah 47:4, Amos 9:7), the
Philistines who came from Crete (Caphtor) were already settled in this region (c. 2000
BCE) in the time of Abraham58. These Philistines associated with the Sea Peoples, have
therefore installed in their ancient colonies before dominating the Israelites. If biblical
research experts agree that the Philistines were from Crete (the system of their
confederation of five tyrants inspired by Aegeans, for example, differed from surrounding
Canaanite kingdoms), the Akkadian Kaptaru or Egyptian Keftiu, they consider however
their mention in the Bible prior to Ramses III as an anachronism59. In fact, the translation
of the Egyptian word Keftiu, "those of Crete/ Cretans" instead of "Crete", not only solves
many paradoxes in Egyptian data, but also confirms the high antiquity of the Philistines,
which the Egyptians called, in accordance with their origin: Cretans from islands in the middle of
the [Mediterranean] sea (= the Minoans, at that time). The term Philistia appeared during the
XXIInd dynasty shortly after the term Keftiu disappeared during the XXth dynasty60.
Vercoutter, despite the large number of documents analyzed, concluded that the
identification Keftiu to Crete was based only on a strong conjecture because other
elements placed this country on North eastern Egypt (not western):
! Egyptian texts that describe geographically Keftiu frequently associate it to the city of
Byblos and located regularly this country near Syria61. Asian list of Amenhotep III
(1383-1345), for example, lists the city of Ugarit (i-k3-r-ÿ-ti) beside Keftiu62 (k-f-tyw).
! An Egyptian engraving63 of vizier Rekhmire (c. 1450 BCE) pictures a prince of Keftiu
(land vassal of Egypt) as Syrian type, first character with a little beard, while his
offerings are of Aegean type, as the fourth character with wavy hair:
! In the Decree of Canopus (238 BCE), the Egyptian word Keftiu is rendered in Greek
as "Phoenicia", a country often equated with Lebanon (fen!u) by the Egyptians.
! In the inscription citing all the "Sea Peoples", the Tjekker (installed in Dor according to
the story Wenamun) and the Philistines are not described as coming from the sea
58 Genesis 21:32-34. However, the city of Gerar, near Gaza (Genesis 10:19), was not governed by a Philistine tyrant (Joshua 13:2-3).
59 R. DE VAUX - Histoire ancienne d'Israël des origines à l'installation en Canaan
Paris 1986 Éd. Gabalda pp. 468-480.
60 G. STEINDORFF – The Statuette of an Egyptian Commissioner in Syria
in: Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 25 (1939) pp. 30-39.

61 J. VERCOUTTER – L'Egypte et le monde égéen préhellénique: étude critique des sources égyptiennes
Le Caire 1956 Éd. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale XXXV pp. 38-157.
62 J. SIMONS – Handbook for the Study of Egyptian Topographical Lists Relating to Western Asia
Leiden 1937 Ed. E.J. Brill pp. 132-133.

63 N. DE GARIES DAVIES – The Tombs of Menkheperrasonb, Amenmose, and Another
in: The Theban Tombs Series V (London 1933) The Egypt Exploration Society Plate IV.
These elements are converging64 to support the identification of the country called
Keftiu "those of Crete", a geographical name, or to "Philistia", an ethnic name. In addition,
Crete was never a vassal of Egypt as was the case of southern Palestine (between 1530 and
1350 BCE). As noted Vercoutter the final w in the word Keftiu (k-f-ti-w) is abnormal (plural
marker) but can be explained linguistically since the Akkadian name kaptaru "Crete"
corresponds to the Egyptian k-f-ti-[r] with a disappearance of the final r. Thus keftiu can be
translated as "those of Kaphto[r]" which refers to Cretans in an ethnic way, not geographic,
similarly Tanayu "those of Dananu" (see letter EA 151)65 refered to Cilicians.
The Aegean list of the funerary monument of Amenhotep III (1383-1345), at Kom
el-Hetan, includes a series of Aegean toponyms (Kythira, Mycenae, Nafplion), and also
Cretan (Amnisos, Phaistos, Knossos, Kydonia) including Keftiu. However, the names
Keftiu (Philistia) and Tanayu (Cilicia) are isolated and on the right66 (north-east of Egypt)
while all other names are on the left (north-west of Egypt):
1) Amnisos 2) Phaistos 3) Kydonia 4) Mycenae 5) Dikte (Boeotia) 6) Messinia 7) Nafplion 1) Keftiu 2) Tanayu
8) Kythira 9) Ilios (Troy) 10) Knossos 11) Amnisos 12) Lyktos [Philistia] [Cilicia]
This arrangement of names shows that for the Egyptians all of these cities, or
countries, formed a western geographical entity whereas Keftiu "those of Crete" and
Tanayu "Cilicia" were eastward. Cretan archeology67 has illuminated the role and exchanges
between the great Aegean, Egyptian and Babylonian empires from the late 3rd millennium
BCE68. The first Babylonian stamps in the name of Sargon69 (2243-2187) appeared in Crete
around 2200 BCE and a stele written under Pharaoh Sesostris I (1946-1901) contains the
expression Horus Kefti which can be translated as "Horus of Crete" by analogy with Horus
Tehenu "Horus of Libyans". Similarly, the Treasury of Tod (discovered in Upper Egypt)
enclosed in 4 chests bearing the cartouche of Pharaoh Amenemhat II (1901-1863) contains
153 silver cups of Minoan manufacturing. These findings show that trade with Crete began
prior 2000 BCE and mainly concerned the exchange of metal (and of precious materials).
Mesopotamia imported mainly Cretan tin and Cypriot copper to make bronze while
Egypt favored Cretan vases including silver rhytons. Some inventory tablets, archived in
temples, allow us to reconstruct the route of these materials70. A tablet found in the palace
of Mari, and dated the 9th year of Zimri-Lim (in 1670 BCE), indicates that 500 kg of tin
came from Crete (kap-ta-ra-i-im) and had passed through several Syrian cities: Aleppo,
64 C. VANDERSLEYEN – Le dossier égyptien des Philistins
in: The Land of Israel: Cross-roads of Civilizations Ed Peeters 1985 pp. 41-53.
65 W.L. MORAN - Les lettres d'El Amarna
in: LIPO n°13 Paris 1987 Éd. Cerf pp. 385-386, 596.
66 J. STRANGE – Caphtor/Keftiu: a new investigation
in: Acta Theologica Danica 14, Leiden 1980, Ed. E.J. Brill pp. 21-27.
67 F. JOANNÈS - Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne
Paris 2001 Éd. Robert Laffont pp. 208-210.

68 R. TREUIL, P. DARCQUE , J.-C. POURSAT, G. TOUCHAIS – Les civilisations égéennes du néolithique et de l'âge de bronze
Paris 2008 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 138-140, 153-154, 161, 419, 456.
69 E.F. WEIDNER – Notes on the Sargon inscription
in: The Journal of Hellenic Studies Vol. 59 (1939) pp. 138-139.

70 M.H. WIENER – The Nature and Control of Minoan Foreign Trade
in: Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology Vol. XC (1991) pp. 325-350.

Hazor and Ugarit, and copper came from Alashiya (=Cyprus, letter EA 40) and Dilmun
(Bahrain) via Magan (Oman). A letter71 (EA 114) sent by Rib-Hadda, mayor of Byblos, to
his suzerain, Pharaoh Amenhotep III (1383-1345), confirms the crucial role of this port
city, as well as the cities of Tyre, Beirut and Sidon, for ships transporting from Alashiya
(Cyprus) to Egypt72. Cretans regularly resided in Canaan because during the stay of King
Zimri-Lim (1680-1667) at Ugarit, it is reported that: on the dock of Ugarit, the Mariotes met
Cretan merchants and their interpreters73. Because of cabotage, Cretan ships made stopover in
Cyprus for copper boarding, then they unloaded a portion of their cargo (tin and copper)
in Byblos, node in maritime trade, which was then transported overland before completing
their journey towards Egypt (for discharging silver vases). This trade route was sometimes
interrupted (after the expulsion of the Hyksos and the destruction of the great harbor of
Avaris by Kamose) as deplored an Egyptian scribe of that time: Really now, nobody can sail to
north, towards Byblos. How will be providing us cedar wood for our coffins that contain our mummies,
products with which must be buried pure priests, oil, which is coming as far as those of Crete (Keftiu), with
which must be embalmed nobles. These wonders will never return (Admonitions of Ipuwer 3:6-8)74.
This interruption did not last long since funerary inscription of Sennefer (Urk IV, 535:2-
16), a Chief Treasury of Tuthmosis III75, reported the purchase of 60 cubits cedar beams
brought into Egypt by sea from Byblos. Thus the Egyptians of that time considered
Cretans (Keftiu), that they rubbed shoulders in "Philistia", were coming from these "islands
in the middle of the sea76 (Crete)" with which they traded. Knossos should be the main
focus exporter77, at least until 1370 BCE (date of the destruction of the palace at Knossos).
To sum up, until 1370 BCE, the Egyptians had relationships with Cretans who
were living in the islands in the middle of the sea (Minoans in Crete) mainly through those
who were residing in their colony of Palestine (Philistines). This extraterritorial extension of
Crete explains the paradoxes concerning the location of Keftiu and the representation of its
inhabitants. The term Keftiu signifying Aegean figures (Minoans from Crete) in the tomb
of Rekhmire (c. -1450) also appears in tombs of Menkheperreseneb and Amenemhab, but
here this term signifies Syrian figures (Philistines), some of which carry Aegean objects.
The earliest iconographical hybrid with Aegean elements is known from the tomb of
Puimre. The figure from the scene with four foreign princes in the tomb of Puimre shares
elements in skin colour and hair style of Aegean figures and clothes of Syrian figures.
Syrian-Aegean iconographically hybrid figures are known from the tomb of
Menkheperreseneb where they occupy the second and third register of the scene with
foreigners together with Syrian figures and only several Aegean figures.78. A text from the
tomb of Amenemheb (TT 85) accompanies three registers with foreigners bringing tribute
in: LIPO n°13 Paris 1987 Éd. Cerf pp. 315-318.
72 S. W ACHSMANN – Keftiu, the “Isles in the Midst of the Sea” and Alashia
in: Aegeans in the Theban Tombs (Peeters, 1987) pp. 93-101.

73 J.-M. MICHAUD – La Bible et l'héritage d'Ougarit
Paris 2005, Éd. GCG, p. 12.

74 A. FERMAT, M. LAPIDUS – Les prophéties de l'Égypte ancienne
Paris 1999 Éd. La Maison de Vie p. 20.

75 N. GRIMAL, B. MENU – Le commerce en Égypte ancienne
in: Bibliothèque d'Étude 21 (1998) Éd. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale pp. 122-123.
76 Y. DUHOUX – Des Minoens en Égypte? «Keftiou» et «les îles au milieu du Grand Vert»
in: Publications de l'Institut Orientaliste de Louvain 52 (2003) Éd. Université catholique de Louvain.
77 N. FERNANDEZ – La Crète du roi Minos. Une brillante civilisation de la protohistoire égéenne
Paris 2008 Éd. L'Harmattan pp. 22, 103-108, 156-159.

78 Aegean figures are distinguished by their reddish skin colour (similar to the skin colour of Egyptian men in iconography), curly hair,
beardless faces, and breechcloths in the tombs of Senenmut, Intef, Puimre, Useramun and the first phase of the tomb of Rekhmire, and
Aegean kilts in the tombs of Menkheperreseneb and the second phase of the tomb of Rekhmire. Syrian figures are recognised by a
yellow skin colour, bearded faces and clothing which might be described as particular kilts different from those of the Aegean and long
robes. Hybrid iconographical figures are also known from these tombs.
U. MATIC – Out of the Word and Out of the Picture? Keftiu and Materializations of ‘Minoans’
in: Encountering Imagery. Materialities, Perceptions, Relations, Ed. Stockholm 2012, pp. 235-253.
at the time Thutmose III, it reads: All chiefs of Upper Retenu, all chiefs of Lower Retenu, Keftiu,
Mennus, all lands united. They say: How great is Your might, victorious king. Thus Keftiu is located
near Palestine (Retenu). In fact Keftiu appears frequently among countries around Palestine
in topographical lists79. For example, on a column drum in Amenhotep III's temple of
Soleb in Nubia is engraved the following topographical list:
1) Kadesh 2) Tunip 3) [----] 4) [----] 5) Ugarit 6) Keftiu 7) Sangar (Shinar) 8) Naharina 9) Hatti 10) -
Another list of names, painted as a row of foreign captives on the base of the king's
throne, is in the tomb of Qenamun (TT 93), chief steward to Amenhotep II (1420-1392):
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1) Upper Egypt 2) Oasis Dwellers 3) Lower Egypt (Delta) 4) Bowmen of the Desert (Sinai) 5) Tehenu (Libya) 6)
Tentdwellers of Nubia 7) Bedouins of Asia (Moab) 8) Naharina 9) Keftiu 10) Minnos (?) 11) Upper Retenu
Another list of names, painted in the tomb of Anen (TT 120), second prophet of
Amun, accompanies a row of captives on the throne base of Amenhotep III: 1) Sangar
(Shinar) 2) Kush 3) Naharina 4) Aram 5) Keftiu 6) Tentdewellers of Nubia 7) Tehenu (Libya) 8)
Bedouins of Asia (Moab) 9) Shasu (Bedouins in Palestine).
Greek historians provide some information that illuminate the ethnic origin of the
Philistines. According to Homer: Amid the vast sea is the beautiful and fruitful island of Crete
thousands of men live, and 90 cities are enclosed in this country, where people speak different languages.
There are Achaeans [Mycenaeans], magnanimous Cretans Aboriginal, Kydonians, Dorians divided into 3
tribes, and divine Pelasgians. Amidst this country stands the city of Knossos, where Minos reigned for 9
years (Odyssey XIX:173-177). Plato confirms this tradition on the primacy of Cretans (Laws
I:1). A scholion on this passage says that the epithet of Zeus Pelasgikos was also read as
Pelastikos. Pelasgians were originally called Pelastians80 which derives the name Philistines
(The words pelagos "high seas", pelasgoi* (pélas-koi) "seamen" and pelastoi "philistines" are
close). According to Thucydides (The Peloponnesian War I:3-4), it is Minos, at the time of
Pelasgians, who established the first organized colonies. Diodorus writes: Tectamus, the son of
Dorus, the son of Hellen, the son of Deucalion, sailed to Crete with Aeolians and Pelasgians and became
king of the island (...) the Cretans go on to say, not a few heroes were to be found in Crete, the most
renowned of whom were Minos and Rhadamanthys and Sarpedon (...) Now Minos, by virtue of his being
the eldest, became king of the island, and he founded on it not a few cities, the most renowned of which were
the three, Knossos in those parts of the island which look toward Asia, Phaestos on the sea-shore to the
south, and Cydonia in the regions to the west facing the Peloponnesus (...) But now that we have examined
these matters it remains for us to discuss the peoples who have become intermixed with the Cretans. That
79 J. STRANGE – Caphtor/Keftiu: a new investigation
80 B. SERGENT – Les indo-européens
Paris 1995 Éd. Payot & Rivages pp. 107-108.

the first inhabitants of the island were known as Eteo-Cretans and that they are considered to have sprung
from the soil itself, we have stated before; and many generations after them Pelasgians, who were in
movement by reason of their continuous expeditions and migrations, arrived at Crete and made their home
in a part of the island (Historical Library IV:60:2, V:78:1-2, V:80:1-2). Herodotus states that
the subjects of Minos were the inventors of mane helmet (The Histories I:171), that is in
agreement with crested helmets represented on Phaistos Disc (dated around 1700 BCE).
Archaeology thanks to the similarity of Minoan and philistine ceramics81 confirmed
the claims of these ancient historians because the Pelasgians lie prior 1800 BCE82. Egyptian
execration texts (dated to 1900-1800) directed men like Haluyakim, Hikisanu, Muri, princes
of Ashkelon, and Yarpilu, a prince of Ekron83. If the names of these princes are Indo-
European the names of the five Philistine cities look Semitic84 (Old Canaanite), which
implies that these Philistine colonists have likely adopted the language of their host country
(Canaan). Current interpretation of archaeological data assuming the occurrence of
Philispins only from the 12th century BCE contradicts historical data, including some
archaeological data showing that these cities were already inhabited prior to 1200 BCE85.
Thus, despite the extreme difficulty of excavation (scarcity of remains and cities still
inhabited), some (Philistine) objects were found on the site of Ekron in the layer IX dated
1470-1400 and on the site of Ashdod in the layer XIV dated 1300-120086.
Chronological reconstruction of Philistia:
! Around -2000, massive departure of Pelastians (former Philistines), a migratory ethnicity
of Crete, towards Palestine (which owes its name). Founding of sale counters at
Ashkelon and Ekron (maybe also Ahsdod, Gaza and Gat). "Philistia" is perceived by the
Egyptians as a province of the Minoan kingdom87.
! About -1930, Abraham met Abimelech, a Canaanite king in Philistine territory (east of
Gaza) and Phicol (Indo-European name), his army commander. Abimelech gave to
Sarah 11 kilos of silver (Genesis 20:16), a rare metal in Palestine but abundant in Crete.
! Circa -1530, expulsion of the Hyksos. "Philistia" is perceived as a Cretan principality
that became vassal of Egypt. According to the biblical text, the Philistines were experts
in the art of forging (Judges 1:18-19, 1Samuel 13:19). An Egyptian list gives (c. 1500
BCE) some Cretan (keftiu) names88 as: Akashu (’ik3"3w), close to Achish, king of Gath
(1Samuel 17:1) and Ben-Ne$abal (bn-nd3b3r), a Semitic name ("son of God has placed").
! Circa -1370, destruction of the palace of Knossos, at this time the name Keftiu
disappears in Egyptian documents89. "Philistia" (formerly Keftiu) becomes an Egyptian
province without specific Egyptian name. Widya (an Indo-European name), mayor of
Ashkelon and Ya[h]tiru (?), mayor of Gaza, were under the orders of Egyptian
commissioners (Letters EA 296 and EA 320-327).
81 M. DELCOR – Philistins, données archéologiques
in: Dictionnaire de la Bible supplément (Letouzey & Ané 1966) pp. 1233-1288.
A.E. KILLEBREW – Biblical Peoples and Etnicity
Atlanta 2005 Ed. Society of Biblical Literature pp. 197-245.
82 N. PAPAHATZIS – Mycènes –Épidaure –Tirythe –Nauplie
Paris 1978, Éd. Clio pp. 12-18.

83 J. BRIEND, M.-J. SEUX – Israël et les nations
in: Supplément au Cahier Evangile 69 (Cerf 1989) pp. 13-15.

84 According to Gesenius: Ahsdod "a fortified place", Ashkelon "migration?", Gaza "strong", Gat "a wine-press", Ekron "eradication".
85 A. MAZAR – Archeology of the Land of the Bible
New York 1990 Ed. Doubleday pp. 242.

86 C.S. EHRLICH - The Philistines in Transition: A History from Ca. 1000-730 B.C.E.
Leiden 1996 Ed. Brill pp. 9-11.

87 P. FAURE – En Crète au temps de Minos 1500 av. J.-C.
Paris 1987 Éd. Hachette pp. 37-40, 253-254.

88 J. VERCOUTTER – L'Egypte et le monde égéen préhellénique: étude critique des sources égyptiennes
Le Caire 1956 Éd. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale XXXV p. 45.

89 The country of Keftiu (kf-ti-w) is quoted in the temple of Ramses II (1283-1216) at Abydos, but it is in fact an Asian "standardized" list
because it is next to Naharina (n-h-r-n) while this country (Mitanni) had been conquered by Shalmaneser I (in 1264 BCE).
! Circa -1185, Philistines associated with Sea Peoples and revolted unsuccessfully against
Egypt. Philistia is now called by the Egyptians according to its ethnicity origin
(Philistines) and not according to its geographical origin (Cretans). It became a province
subordinate to Israel. The name Goliath was close to the Lydian name Alyattes and to
the name wrote ‘LWT on an inscription (dated c. -900) found at Tel es-Safi (Gath?).
! Circa -800, Adad-nerari III attacked Philistia (Pala"tu) which became, despite several
harshly repressed revolts, a vassal country of the Assyrian empire90.
! In -604, Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed Ashkelon (which will then be attached to Tyr).
The province of Philistia is integrated into the Babylonian empire and lost all autonomy.
! Circa -450, Herodotus called Syria-Palestine the region that covered ancient Philistia,
Judea and Samaria (The Histories I:105, II:106, III:5.91, VII:89).
! In -238, in the Decree of Canopus the Egyptian word Keftiu is rendered in Greek as
"Phoenicia", a country often equated to Lebanon (fen!u) by the Egyptians.
! In -147, Demetrius, son of Demetrius, came from Crete in the country of his fathers,
Syria-Palestine. The Philistine temple of Azotus (Ashdod), dedicated to Beth-Dagon, is
then burned (1Maccabees 10:67, 83; 11:4). The Philistines are then no longer mentioned.
Archaeologists have long believed that the Aegeans representations in Egyptian
tombs fell more under artistic convention than historical accuracy. This negative bias, as
for biblical data on Crete and Philistines, has since been refuted by a thorough analysis of
all these representations91. The first trade links between Egypt to the Aegean world could
even go up to -2400 because it was discovered on the island of Cythera, a glass in marble
on behalf of the Solar Temple Userkaf92. These trips could possibly be by sea because a
boat with about twenty sailors on board (Egyptian and Phoenician) is represented on the
walls of the mortuary temple of King Sahure at Abusir93.
As the history of Philistines only beginning to emerge we can not use its
shortcomings to discredit the biblical data, which are further confirmed by archaeological
discoveries. Cretan language remains unknown so far as Philistine language (perhaps they
have a common bond with the Linear A)94.
HITTITES IN THE TIME OF ABRAHAM ARE THEY ANACHRONISTIC?
A Bible reference dictionary95 states: At the beginning of the XIIth century several waves of
migration from Europe spred through Western Asia. One of them, assigned by the Egyptian texts to the
Sea Peoples, destroyed Ugarit and probably passes through Anatolia where it mingles with other movements
of people and put an end to the Hittite Empire around 1170 BC. The collapse of Hittite Empire did not
mean the end of Hittite civilization. It survives in a series of small neo-Hittite states of northern Syria, as
Carchemish and Hamath, or in states of mixed arameo-Hittite civilization as Sam'al and Bit-Adini
(Beth-Eden). Assyrian and Babylonian texts describe these Hittite states and extend this term for the
entire Syro-Palestine, including even Philistine and Phoenician cities on the coast. This practice continued
after the subjugation and annexation of the Neo-Hittite and Aramaic states by Assyria and there is
evidence until time of Antiochus I Soter (281-261 BC). Most biblical references to the Hittites are related
to the latter use of this term and should be used only as some anachronistic archaisms. This refers both to
90 P. GARELLI, A. LEMAIRE - Le Proche-Orient Asiatique Tome 2
Paris 1997 Éd. P.U.F. pp. 93-96.
91 D. PANAGIOTOPOULOS – Keftiu in Context: Theban Tomb-painting as a Historical Source
in: Oxford Journal of Archaeology 20 (2001) pp. 263-283.

92 J. VERCOUTTER - L'Egypte et la vallée du Nil
Paris 1992 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 292.

93 N. JENKINS – La barque royale de Cheops
Paris 1983 Éd. France-Empire pp. 102-103.

94 F.M. CROSS in: The New York Times (13 mars 2007).
95 E. LIPINSKI – Hittites
in: Dictionnaire encyclopédique de la Bible (Brépols, 1987) p. 591.

the mention of the Hittites in the lists of pre-Israelites people of Palestine as stories certainly postexilic from
Gn 23:3-20 (cf. 2:,9s; 49,29-32) and 26:34s; 27:46. In reality, the Hittites of history have never
dominated or even inhabited Palestine. The Israelites, however, known neo-Hittite states of Syria and the
Bible made explicit reference of it in 1R 10:29 - 2Ch 1:17; 1R 11:1, 2R 7:6. This short excerpt
contains an untruth: the Bible never said that the Hittites had lived in Palestine, and a big
contradiction: if most biblical references were "anachronistic archaisms" why the author
wrote at the beginning of his article: the Hittites of history are a people of central Anatolia, formed
by the merger of Indo-European immigrants, settled in the country from the XXth century BC, with the
indigenous inhabitants who were the real Hittites, but whose language is now called "Hatti" to distinguish
it from the Hittite, which is the main idiom of Indo-European immigrants. They took over the name of the
indigenous group, but eventually imposed their language, they began writing in the XVIth century, using the
cuneiform tradition borrowed from a provincial northern Syria. From the XVth century, they also made use
of "Hittite hieroglyphics", which is a system of symbols, some of which appear before this date as isolated
symbols. This original pictographic writing was used until the VIIth century BC.
What says exactly the Bible on the Hittites and do this information contradict the
meager data we have on them? The Hittites appear from the time of Abraham (c. -1900)
and at the time of Joshua (c. -1500) and finally in the period of the kings with David (2
Samuel 11:3) and Solomon (c. -990) who traded with Hittite kings of Carchemish (1 Kings
10:28-29). Neo-Hittite kingdom was a remnant of the vast Hittite empire which collapsed
suddenly in 1185 BCE during the attack of the Sea Peoples in Year 8 of Ramesses III. His
account describes protagonists: on one hand Sea Peoples (coalition of Philistines from
Crete, Tjekkers from Troas, Sicilians from Sicily?, Denyens and Wesheshs, federated by
Mycenaeans) and on the other hand Hatti and its vassal kingdoms (coast of Cilicia,
Carchemish, Western Anatolia, Cyprus) destroyed in one fell swoop. The coordination of
these coalitions reflects a remarkable logistics96 which proves the existence of a war. Egypt
was the center of a conflict, at first for trading, that escalated into war (pirates becoming
mercenaries) between the two great coalitions. This explains the presence of both prisoners
from both coalitions representations campaign of Ramses III in Amurru97.
The 1st prisoner (left) is a Prince of Hatti (!t), the 2nd a prince of Amurru (’im‘r), the
3rd the leader of the Tjekkers (tkry), the 4th the leader of the Shardanes ("3rd3n), the 5th the
Chief of the Siculi ("3[kr"]) and the 6th is an Etruscan (twr"3). The kingdom of Amurru
being in the sphere of Hittite influence, partly controlled by Egypt, which explains the
order of the prisoners: first Hittites, at the origin of the conflict, then the Sea Peoples, the
new attackers called "conspirators in the islands" by Ramses III. This momentous event
marked a turning point in Hittite history and its chronology98:
96 J. LECLANT – Dictionnaire de l'Antiquité
Paris 2005 Éd. P.U.F. p. 1712.
97 J. B. PRITCHARD - The Ancient Near East in Pictures
Princeton 1969 Ed. Princeton University Press pp. 4,250.

98 http://www.hittites.info/history.aspx
J. FREU – Note sur les sceaux des rois de Mitanni/Mittani

in: NABU (mars 2008) pp. 5-8.
HATTU!A KANESH CARCHEMISH

HATTIAN PERIOD
? (Nur-Dagan) -2200 ?
? ? ?
Pamba 2150-2130 Zipani 2150-2130 ?
? ? ? (Abraham) -1900
? !urmeli 1750-1730 ?
? !arpatiwa 1730-1710 ?
? Inar 1710-1690 ?
? War"ama 1690-1670 Aplahanda 1690-1670
? Pit"ana 1670 - Yatar-Ami 1670-1668
? -1650 Yahdul-Lim 1668-1649
Piyu"ti 1650-1630 Anitta 1650-1630 ?
Hattusa destroyed Zûzu 1630-1610 ?
EARLY EMPIRE KU!!AR Kanesh destroyed
!uzziya I ? 1605-1585 ?
Tud"aliya ? 1585-1565 ?
PU-!arruma ? 1565-1550 ?
Hattusa rebuilt Labarna 1550-1530 ?
!attu"ili I 1530-1510 ?
Mur"ili I 1510-1500 ?
!antili I 1500-1495 ? (Joshua) -1500
Zidanta I 1495 ?
Ammuna 1495-1485 ?
!uzziya II 1485 ?
Telipinu 1485-1480 ?
MIDDLE EMPIRE
Alluwamna 1480-1475 ?
!antili II 1475-1470 ?
Ta"urwaili I 1470 ?
Zidanza (II) 1470-1465 ?
!uzziya III 1465-1460 ?
Muwatalli I 1460-1455 ?
Tut"aliya I 1455-1435 ?
!attu"ili II 1435-1425 ?
Tut"aliya II 1425-1395 ?
Arnuwanda I 1395-1370 ?
Tut"aliya III 1370-1355 ?
LATE EMPIRE
!uppiluliuma I 1353-1322 !arri-Ku"uh 1325 -
Arnuwanda II 1322 (Piya""ili)
Mur"ili II 1322 - -1310
-1295 !a"unuruwa 1310 -
Muwatalli II 1295-1275
Urhi-Teshub 1275 - -1255
-1268 Ini-Te"ub I 1255 -
!attu"ili III 1268-1241
Tut"aliya IV 1241 - -1220
-1209 Talmi-Te"ub 1220 -
Arnuwanda III 1209-1207
!uppiluliyama II 1207-1185 -1185
Hattusa destroyed NEO-HITTITE KINGS
Kuzi-Te"ub 1185-1150
Ini-Te"ub II 1150-1115
Tudhaliya 1115-1080
[-]pazitis 1080-1025
Ura-Tarhunzas 1025-990
? (Solomon) 990 -
Pisiris -717
Carchemish, the capital of the Neo-Hittite kingdom from 1185 BCE, was in fact an
old city since it had been vassal of kings of Ebla (c. 2000 BCE), then Aleppo and finally of
Hittites kings, likely from Mur"ili I99 (1510-1500). At the time of Joshua, Carchemish was
the capital of the Hittite empire immediately after Hattu"a. For example, Piya""ili, a son of
!uppiluliuma I was made King of Carchemish and Mur"ili II, !uppiluliuma's successor,
became King of Hattu"a100. The presence of Hittites in the area of Carchemish (northern
Syria), at the time of Mur"ili I (c. 1500 BCE), was therefore important.
According to the Bible, when Joshua entered the Promised Land (in 1493 BCE) he
would expel a number of nations, including the Hittites: When Jehovah your God at last brings
you into the land to which you are going so as to take possession of it, he must also clear away populous
nations from before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the
Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations more populous and mighty than you are
(Deuteronomy 7:1). These Hittites were located north of Syria: Every place upon which the sole
of your foot will tread, to you people I shall certainly give it, just as I promised to Moses. From the
wilderness and this Lebanon to the great river, the river Euphrates, that is, all the land of the Hittites, and
to the Great Sea toward the setting of the sun your territory will prove to be (...) And it came about that as
soon as all the kings who were on the side of the Jordan in the mountainous region and in the Shephelah
and along the whole coast of the Great Sea and in front of Lebanon, the Hittites and the Amorites, the
Canaanites, the Perizites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, heard of it, they began to assemble themselves all
together to make war against Joshua and Israel unanimously (Joshua 1:3-4; 91-2). After the death of
Joshua all these nations returned to their places of origin: Accordingly Jehovah let these nations
stay by not driving them out quickly, and he did not give them into Joshua’s hand (...) And the sons of
Israel dwelt in the midst of [not with] the Canaanites, the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites
and the Hivites and the Jebusites (Judges 2:23; 3:5). The few scattered references that we have
to Hantili's reign (1500-1495) indicate he intented on maintening Hittite influence on Syria.
In the tradition of Hattu"ili and Mur"ili, he conducted military operations in the region
reaching Carchemish on the Euphrates. Very likely his campaign was directed against
Hurrians. How successful this campaign was remains unknown101. The Hittites, south of
Euphrates, mentioned in the time of Joshua and Hantili I (c. 1495) are therefore the same.
The Hittites met by Abraham are not quite the same as those of Joshua since they
are identified as "sons of Heth": So Sarah died in Kiriath-arba, that is to say, Hebron, in the land of
Canaan, and Abraham came in to bewail Sarah and to weep over her. Then Abraham got up from before
his dead and proceeded to speak to the sons of Heth, saying: “An alien resident and settler I am among
you. Give me the possession of a burial place among you that I may bury my dead out of my sight.” At this
the sons of Heth answered Abraham, saying to him: “Hear us, my lord. A chieftain of God you are in the
midst of us. In the choicest of our burial places bury your dead. None of us will hold back his burial place
from you to prevent burying your dead.” Thereupon Abraham got up and bowed down to the natives, to the
sons of Heth, and spoke with them, saying: “If your souls agree to bury my dead out of my sight, listen to
me and urge Ephron the son of Zohar for me, that he may give me the cave of Machpelah, which is his,
which is at the extremity of his field. For the full amount of silver let him give it to me in the midst of you
for the possession of a burial place.” As it was, Ephron was sitting among the sons of Heth. So Ephron
100 Piya""ili was a Hittite prince, and a middle son of King !uppiluliuma I; younger than the heir Arnuwanda II, but older than the
eventual successor Mur"ili II. After !uppiluliuma concluded a treaty with !attiwazza, son of King Tu"ratta of Mitanni, and married one
of his daughters to him, Piya""ili led a Hittite army that put !attiwazza on the throne of Hanigalbat. According to Hittite sources, Piya""ili
and !attiwazza crossed the Euphrates at Carchemish, then marched against Irridu, already in Hurrian territory. After having reduced
Irridu and Harran, they continued east towards Wa""ukanni and perhaps conquered the capital Taite as well. After !attiwazza had been
made a vassal ruler of Hanigalbat, !uppiluliuma gave to Piya""ili the Hurrian name !arri-Ku"uh. In fact, the whole former territory of
Hanigabat west of the Euphrates seems to have come under direct Hittite rule and was governed by Piya""ili.
101 T. BRYCE –The Kingdom of the Hittites
Oxford 2005 Ed. Oxford University Press p. 100.

the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the sons of Heth with all those entering the gate of his city
(Genesis 23:2-10). This Ephron ("of a calf"), son of Zohar ("tawny"), was not a Hittite in a
usual manner because his birth name and that of his father are not Hittite but Canaanite,
implying that they were settled in this region for a long time. This raises two questions: 1)
were there Hittites at this time (c. -1900) and 2) in this region (Hebron)?
All specialists agree that the origins of Hittite history are still full of darkness and
many uncertainties remain102. According to a well-known tradition (c. 1400 BCE), Naram-
Sin of Akkad (2163-2126) marched against a coalition of 17 kings including Pamba king of
Hatti, and Zipani king of Kanesh. The existence of Hittite homeland is thus very old, but
this Hittite kingdom of Pamba is doubly paradoxical: 1) it only covered a small part of
Hatti (a region around the city of Hattusa) and 2) Hittite language was not used but Nesite
(or Neseli). The Hattians103 were an ancient people who inhabited the land of Hatti
(present-day central Anatolia, Turkey). The group was documented at least as early as the
empire of Sargon of Akkad (2243-2187), until it was gradually absorbed c. 2000–1700 BCE
by the Indo-European Hittites, who became identified with the "land of Hatti". The oldest
name for central Anatolia, "Land of the Hatti", was found on Mesopotamian cuneiform
tablets from the period of Sargon the Great of Akkad: on those tablets Assyrian-Akkadian
traders implored King Sargon for help. This appellation continued to exist for about 1500
years until 630 BCE, as stated in Assyrian chronicles. According to later Hittite documents,
Sargon the Great had fought with the Luwian king Nurdaggal of Burushanda. The Hattians
spoke Hattic, a non-Indo-European language of uncertain affiliation. Many Northwest
Caucasian family names have prefixes like "Hath" or "Hatti", and one of the well known
Adygean tribes has the name "Hattico" (in the meaning of "Hatti-son"). Evidence of a
'Hattic' civilization is provided by the remnants of one of the non-Indo-European
languages found in the later Hittite archives. The language is identified in several of the
texts in which it appears by the term hattili- '(written) in the language of Hatti'. The few
texts that survive are predominantly religious or cultic in character. Thus the use of the
word "Proto-Hittite" to refer to Hattians is inaccurate104. Hittite (Nesite = from the city
Nesa/ Kanesh) is an Indo-European language, linguistically distinct from the Hattians. The
Hittites continued to use the term Land of Hatti for their new kingdom and they always
called themselves "people of the Land of Hatti (Heth)". The Hattians eventually merged
with people, who spoke Indo-European languages like Hittite, Luwian and Palaic105. The
Hattians were organized in feudal city-states and small kingdoms or principalities (perhaps
up to six). These cities were well organized and ruled as theocratic principalities.
Since Nesite was the official language of the Hittite kingdom, it is a natural
assumption that this was the language spoken by its ruling class. Its use may have spread
quite widely beyond the Nesa region, perhaps already serving as a kind of lingua franca in
Anatolia. It would have been much more readily learnt and understood in many parts of
western and south-eastern Anatolia where Luwian was spoken, than the Hattic language, or
any other language spoken within the sphere of Assyrian merchant activities. Primarily for
this reason Nesite (Hittite) continued to be used as the official chancellery language in
Hattusa when the Hittite kingdom was established, and as the language of written
communications between the royal court and the various peoples of Anatolia, particularly
in the west. But there may have been other reasons for the continuing use of Hittite, at
102 J.-C. MARGUERON, L. PFIRSCH – Le Proche-Orient et l'Égypte antique
Paris 2012, Éd. Hachette supérieur, p. 212.
103 T. BRYCE –The Kingdom of the Hittites
Oxford 2005 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 11-20.

104 J. FREU, M. MAZOYER, I. KLOCK -FONTANILLE – Des origines à la fin de l'ancien royaume hittite
Paris 2007 Éd. L'Harmattan pp. 15-16.

105 Luwian, Palaic and Nesite were the languages originally spoke in Luwiya (somewhere in Lydia), Pala (North of Hattusa) and Nesa.
least within the royal court. The royal succession in Hatti remained the prerogative of a
small group of families throughout the entire history of the Hittite kingdom. And those
who occupied the throne frequently proclaimed their genealogical links with their earliest
known predecessors (as in Genesis 23:2-10). These links helped substantiate their claims to
the throne. Nesite was to remain the language of royalty throughout the period of the
Hittite kingdom, it reflected the retention of an important dynastic tradition. This does not
mean that the use of Nesite was confined to the members of royalty. At the very least it
extended down through the various levels of the kingdom's administrative hierarchy. It
was, for example, the language used by scribes and other officials in the kingdom's regional
centers, as illustrated by the personal notes exchanged, as appendages to official dispatches,
between Hattusa-based bureaucrats and their counterparts in Tapikka.
Hittites from this period (2000-1700 BCE) are known mainly through Assyrian
merchants letters (written in paleo-Assyrian). These merchants lived temporarily in towns
near the road linking Kanesh to Assyria but traded with the inhabitants in the south of
Anatolia106 where there were major Hittite commercial counters such as those in Mama,
Zalpa and Urshum (near Carchemish). The two most important city-states of this time in
the Land of Hatti were Kani" and Mama107.
The Hittites living in Syria had to play an important role in Hittite history because
the first Hittite cuneiform use for writing was that of the Ur III dynasty (around -2000) and
not the one from Assyrian merchants established in Asia Minor to -1900, thus this
diplomatic writing (very different from hieroglyphic Hittite) had to be acquired in Syria,
their place of origin108. The Hittites who lived in Syria, and sometimes in Canaan, wanted to
define themselves by their genealogical link "people from the land of Heth" as does the
Bible (Genesis 26:34; 36:2), the original "land" being likely the region around Hat-tu"a.
107 C. MICHEL – Correspondance des marchands de Kani" au début du Iie millénaire avant J.-C.
in: Littératures Anciennes du Proche-Orient 19 (Cerf , 2001), pp. 105, 117-130.

108 M. RIEMSCHNEIDER – Le monde des Hittites
Paris 1955, Éd. Corrêa, pp. 9-16.

ARAMEANS IN THE TIME OF ABRAHAM ARE THEY ANACHRONISTIC?
Javier Teixidor109 concludes at the end of his recent study110 about the Aramean
origin of biblical patriarchs: The theme of the military conquest of Canaan, the Promised Land, which
is the third element of the historical credo of Deuteronomy 26:5-9, derives from the stay of these Arameans/
Hebrews in Egypt (...) Our knowledge of the ancient Oriental world is based on two research areas: the
archaeological excavations with the analysis, classification and study of monuments and objects of all kinds,
and literary or epigraphic. Archaeological finds of recent years have greatly increased our knowledge of the
history of Western Asia, a story that gradually reveals the cultural cohesion of political and religious
institutions in many Semitic populations. The corpus of ancient texts is important, and it is growing.
Watched closely, taking into account the research done on the field but also the review of documents have
long been known, these texts can explain more accurately, and consistently, certain books of the Old
Testament. Better analysis of literary sources can, in fact, shed a new light on the life and works of biblical
characters. We have today, perhaps more than ever the sense of what is likely; Orientalists will not be able
perhaps not always tell what was happening, but they often know that could not happen. In the passage of
Deuteronomy that I called the « historical credo », the second element, the sojourn in Egypt, has been
studied here from epigraphic and literary documents of the VIIth, VIth and Vth centuries concerning Judah
from Egypt and it is in the middle they originate which has arisen the writing of Exodus, which is a
national epic and not a historical document. With respect to the third element of that « credo », the conquest
of Canaan, one must stick firmly to the present archaeological research which seriously question this episode.
After the exile, had to find in this tradition the explanation of present, a political present, even religious,
and imagining that there had been a victory over the inhabitants of Canaan a reality was given to the
promises made by Yahweh to his people. Roland de Vaux was yet more severe on the authenticity
of the Aramaeans in the time of Abraham111: But can we talk about the Arameans at the time of
the patriarchs? (...) The first guaranteed mention of the Aramaeans in cuneiform texts is dated Tiglath-
Pileser I, who in the fourth year of his reign, around 1110 BC, fought the A!lamu-Arameans along the
Euphrates (...) One could go a little earlier with an Egyptian document: a geographical list of the reign of
Amenhotep III contains the name p3 ’rm that can be interpreted as « the land of Aram », or because of the
person determinative « the people of the land of Aram », the Arameans. Unfortunately, the other names in
this fragmentary list are not identifiable and the geographical placement of this group is uncertain. Anyway,
unless much rejuvenating the Patriarchs, the present state of our informaton invites us to consider as an
anachronism references to Aram and Arameans in the stories of Genesis.
It is yet sufficient consulting a popular encyclopedia (Wikipedia) to see that the
previous conclusions are completely wrong: The origin of the Arameans is still uncertain, arising
from the limited amount of evidence regarding the mention of Arameans in Mesopotamian inscriptions. The
toponym A-ra-mu appears in an inscription at Ebla listing geographical names, and the term Armi, which
is the Eblaite term for nearby Aleppo, occurs frequently in the Ebla tablets (ca. 2300 BC). One of the
annals of Naram-Sin of Akkad (c. 2250 BC) mentions that he captured "Dubul, the ensi of A-ra-me"
(Arame is seemingly a genitive form), in the course of a campaign against Simurrum in the northern
mountains. Other early references to a place or people of "Aram" have appeared at the archives of Mari (c.
1900 BC) and at Ugarit (c. 1300 BC). There is little agreement concerning what, if any, relationship
there was between these places, or if the Aramu were actually Arameans; the earliest undisputed mention of
Arameans as a people is in the inscriptions of Tiglath Pileser I (c. 1100 BC). The Ahlamû (= wanderers)
are first mentioned in the el-Amarna letters alluding to the king of Babylon; the presence of the Ahlamû
109 Honorary professor at the Collège de France (Chair in Semitic Antiquities).
110 J. TEIXIDOR – Mon père, l'Araméen errant
Paris 2003, Éd. Albin Michel, pp. 211-218.
Paris 1986 Éd. Gabalda, pp. 194-198.

R. de Vaux was OP Director of the Ecole Biblique, a French Catholic Theological School, member of the Dominican Institute for
Oriental Studies and co-director of the Jerusalem Bible.
are also attested in Assyria, Nippur and even at Dilmun (Bahrain); Shalmaneser I (1274-1245 BC)
defeated the Shattuara, King of Mitanni and his Hittite and Ahlamû mercenaries are mentioned in the
Jazirah. The term appears equivalent to the Egyptian term Shasu (Shsw = wanderer), who replaced the
outlaw 'Apiru (cuneiform SA.GAZ) as the major source of instability in the Egyptian Levantine empire
from the reign of Tutankhamun onwards. In the following century, the Ahlamû cut the road from Babylon
to Hattusas, and Tukulti-Ninurta I (1244-1208 BC) claims that he conquered Mari, Hana and
Rapiqum on the Euphrates and "the mountain of the Ahlamû", apparently the region of Jebel Bishri. In
addition, an ethnic group called !almeans (Arameans) is mentioned (prior 1900 BCE) north
of Babylonia (The lamentation over the destruction of Sumer and Ur, line 255)
What says the Bible about Arameans and do archaeological finds confirm, or refute,
this information? "Aram" is used to designate: 1) the descendants of Aram (Genesis 10:23),
2) a geographical area (Mesopotamia then Syria) and 3) a language (Aramaic). Very often
this word is translated as "Syria/ Syrian" which is only right after the entry into the
Promised Land (c. -1500). Arameans were semi-nomads (wanderers) who moved during the
2nd millennium from Mesopotamia to Syria112. The geographical area, as well as the language
changed during this period. For example, Jacob who lived in Canaan met Laban (c. -1800)
in Haran, a city of Paddan-Aram (Genesis 31:18,20). The two men spoke almost the same
language with the exception of certain words like "witness heap" rendered as jegar-sahadutha
in Aramaic but galeed in Old Canaanite (Genesis 31:46-47). However, about 1100 years
later, the two languages became so different that the Jews who speak Hebrew could no
longer include Assyrian messengers if they speak in Aramaic (2Kings 18:26-28).
The region covered by Aram is sometimes specified. During the first campaign of
David (1049-1042), for example, a king of Hamath named To‘î (2Samuel 8:9-10) or To‘û
(1Chronicles 18:9-10) is mentioned and he is presented as a contemporary of Hadadezer
king of [Aram]-Zobah113 (1Chronicles 18:3-10). A this time there were at least 3 Arameans
areas: Aram-Naharaim, Aram-Maacah and Aram-Zobah (1Chronicles 19:6). As the word
Naharaim means "two rivers [i.e. the Euphrates and the Tigris]" in Hebrew, it has been
translated into Greek as Mesopotamia "midst of [two] rivers". The Amarna letters (c. -1350)
use it under the form Na!arima (letter EA 288), a syllabic transcription of (Aram)-
Naharaim, to designate a region also known by them as Mitanni (Meten).
112 J.-R. KUPPER – Les nomades en Mésopotamie au temps des rois de Mari
Paris 1982 Éd. Les Belles Lettres pp. 260-263.
113 According to Psalm 60 Sup, the region of Zobah was in fact Aram-Zobah.
If at the time of David (c. -1050) the "kings of Aram" could be called "kings of
Syria" (Damascus kingdom) four centuries earlier the area named Aram-Naharaim covered
mainly Upper Mesopotamia. For example: At this Jehovah’s anger blazed against Israel, so that he
sold them into the hand of Cushan-rishathaim the king of Aram-Naharaim and the sons of Israel
continued to serve Cushan-rishathaim 8 years. And the sons of Israel began to call to Jehovah for aid. Then
Jehovah raised a savior up for the sons of Israel that he might save them, Othniel the son of Kenaz the
younger brother of Caleb. The spirit of Jehovah now came upon him, and he became the judge of Israel.
When he went out to battle, then Jehovah gave Cushan-rishathaim the king of Aram into his hand so that
his hand overpowered Cushan-rishathaim (Judges 3:8-10). Cushan-rishathaim, the king of Aram-
Naharaim, ruled the land Israel from 1452 to 1444 BCE:
N° years period reference
Abraham (Ur=>Haran) 75 2038-1963 Genesis 12:4-5
stay in Canaan-Egypt 430 1963-1533 Exodus 12:40-41
Moses (Exodus) 40 1533-1493 Exodus 16:35
1 Joshua 110 - 80 1493-1463 Joshua 14:10;24:29
2 Without judge [11] 1463-1452 Joshua 24:31
sub total N° 1-2 41 1493-1452 Numbers 32:13
3 Cushan-rishataim 8 1452-1444 Judges 3:8
4 Othniel 40 1444-1404 Judges 3:11
5 Eglon 18 1404-1386 Judges 3:14
6 Ehud 80 1386-1306 Judges 3:30
7 Madian 7 1306-1299 Judges 6:1
8 Gedeon 40 1299-1259 Judges 8:28
9 Abimelek 3 1259-1256 Judges 9:22
10 Tola 23 1256-1233 Judges 10:2
11 Jair 22 1233-1211 Judges 10:3
12 Anarchia 18 1211-1193 Judges 10:8
sub total N° 1-12 300 1493-1193 Judges 11:26,30
13 Jephte 6 1193-1187 Judges 12:7
14 Ibzan 7 1187-1180 Judges 12:9
15 Elon 10 1180-1170 Judges 12:11
16 Abdon 8 1170-1162 Judges 12:14
17 [Eli] Philistines 40 1162-1122 1Samuel 4:18
18 Samson 20 1122-1102 Judges 16:31
19 Samuel's sons [5] 1102-1097 1Samuel 8:1-3
20 Saul 40 1097-1057 Acts 13:21
21 David 40 1057-1017 1Kings 2:11
22 Solomon (year 4) 4 1017-1013 1Kings 6:1
sub total N° 1-22 480 1493-1013 1Kings 6:1
23 Salomon 40 1017 - 977 1Kings 11:42
24 Rehoboam 17 977-960 1Kings 14:21
25 Abiyam 3 960-957 1Kings 15:2
26 Asa 41 957-916 1Kings 15:10
27 Jehosaphat 25 - 2 916-893 1Kings 22:42
28 Jehoram 8 893-885 2Kings 8:17
29 [Athaliah] 7-1 885-879 2Kings 11:4
30 Joash 40 879-839 2Kings 12:1-2
31 Amasiah 29 839-810 2Kings 14:2
32 Uzziah (Azariah) 52 810-758 2Kings 15:2
33 Jotham 16 758-742 2Kings 15:33
34 Ahaz 16 742-726 2Kings 16:2
35 Hezekiah 29 726-697 2Kings 18:2
36 Manasseh 55 697-642 2Kings 21:1
37 Amon 2 642-640 2Kings 21:19
38 Josias 31 640-609 2Kings 22:1
39 Jehoiaqim 11 609-598 2Kings 23:36
40 Zedekiah 11 598-587 2Kings 24:18
sub total N° 24-40 390 977-587 Ezehiel 4:5-6
Babylonian empire 70 609-539 Jeremiah 25:11-12
Historical context of Mesopotamia around 1450 BCE
KING OF HATTI reign KING OF UGARIT reign KING OF MITANNI reign

!uzziya I ? 1605-1585 Mabu’u/’il 1605-1590
Tud"aliya ? 1585 - Ibirânu I 1590-1575
-1565 Ya’dur-Addu/ 1575-1560 /E"li-Te"ub
PU-!arruma ? 1565-1550 Niqmepa II 1560-1545
Labarna 1550-1530 Ibirânu II 1545-1530
!attu"ili I 1530-1510 Ammurapi I 1530-1515
Mur"ili I 1510-1500 Niqmepa III 1515-1500
!antili I 1500-1495 Ibirânu III 1500 - Kirta 1500 -
Zidanta I 1495
Ammuna 1495-1485 -1485 -1485
!uzziya II 1485 Niqmepa IV 1485 - !utarna I 1485 -
Telipinu 1485-1480 -1480
Alluwamna 1480-1475 Barattarna I 1480 -
!antili II 1475-1470
Ta"urwaili I 1470 -1470
Zidanza (II) 1470-1465 Ibirânu IV 1470 -
!uzziya II 1465-1460
Muwatalli I 1460-1455 -1450 -1455
Tut"aliya I 1455-1435 Niqmaddu I 1450-1430 !au"tatar I 1455-1435
!attu"ili II 1435-1425 Yaqaru 1430-1415 Par"atatar 1435-1425
Tut"aliya II 1425-1395 Ibirânu V 1415-1395 !au"tatar II 1425-1395
Arnuwanda I 1395 - Niqmaddu II 1395-1380 Barattarna II 1395-1390
-1370 Niqmepa V 1380 - Artatama I 1390-1373
Tut"aliya III 1370-1355 -1360 !utarna II 1373-1355
!uppiluliuma I 1353 - Ammi"tamru II 1360 - Arta"umara 1355-1353
-1345 Tu"ratta 1353-1339
Niqmaddu III 1345 - Artatama II 1339-1325
-1322 !utarna III 1339-1325
Arnuwanda II 1322 -1315 !attiwaza 1325 -
Mur"ili II 1322-1295 Ar"albu 1315-1310 -1300
Muwatalli II 1295 - Niqmepa VI 1310 - !attuara I 1300-1285
-1275 Wa"a"atta 1285-1275
Urhi-Teshub 1275-1268 -1260 !attuara II 1275-1265
The name Cushan-rishataim was amended by derision because it means "Kushan of

double wickedness" in Hebrew (see Jeremiah 50:21), the transcription Khousarsatos in the
Septuagint is probably more authentic (ku"ar"ata?). The period 1480-1450 corresponds to a
period of expansion westwards of Mitanni (far as Syria), mainly due to the policy of
conquest of two kings: Barattarna I then !au"tatar I114. The Egyptians were concerned
about that aggressive expansion. During his first campaign, in year 22 (in 1450 BCE),
Thutmose III states that he fought 330 rebel princes who were under the orders of the king
of Kadesh and were thus indirectly in the wake of the "prince of Naharina". !au"tatar I the
king of Mitanni, also called Hanigalbat, corresponds well to Cushan-rishathaim the king of
Aram-Naharaim. However, the word Aram-Naharani refers to a geographical area (land),
not ethnic or linguistic, because kings of Mitanni were of Indo-Aryan origin and spoke
Hurrian. The word paddan means "area" in Aramean thus the name Paddan-Aram (Genesis
47:8) could be translated as "area of Arameans"115.
The area covered by the Mitanni around 1500 BCE was traveled by Aramaean
tribes which came from Lower Mesopotamia116. The term A!lamû "Arameans" was used to
designate nomadic enemies of Assyria117 under A""ur-rê"-i"i I (1133-1115), Tukultî-Ninurta
I (1242-1206), Salmanazar I (1271-1242), Adad-nêrârî I (1302-1271) and Arik-dên-ili (1313-
1302). Around 1350 BCE, the term A!lamû (see El-Amarna letter EA 200) was used to
designate some disruptives in the Nippur area118 under Burna-Buria" II (1360-1333).
According to the Bible, the Aramaeans had settled mainly in Lower Mesopotamia
prior to 1800 BCE: Joshua then said to all the people: Yahweh, the God of Israel, says this, "From time
immemorial, your ancestors, Terah, father of Abraham and Nahor, lived beyond the Euphrates, and served
other gods. I then brought your ancestor Abraham from beyond the Euphrates and led him through the
length and breadth of Canaan. I increased his descendants and I gave him Isaac (Joshua 24:1-2); In the
presence of Yahweh your God, you will then pronounce these words: My father was a wandering Aramaean,
who went down to Egypt with a small group of men, and stayed there, until he there became a great,
powerful and numerous nation (Deuteronomy 26:5); The God of glory appeared to our ancestor
Abraham, while he was in Mesopotamia before settling in Haran, and said to him, "Leave your country,
your kindred and your father's house for this country which I shall show you" (Acts 7:2-3); Then Isaac
sent Jacob away, and Jacob went to Paddan-Aram, to Laban son of Bethuel the Aramaean and brother of
Rebekah the mother of Jacob and Esau (Genesis 28:5); Jacob fled to the countryside of Aram, Israel
slaved to win a wife, to win a wife he looked after sheep (Hosea 12:13). The term Aram designated
the country of the Arameans at that time: 2200-1800 BCE. This country is therefore very
ancient119 it appears as a toponym (A-ra-muki) in an inscription at Ebla listing geographical
names (c. -2200), in some inscriptions of Naram-Sin (2163-2126): the ruler of Simurrum [near
Diyala river] (and) Dubul, the ruler of Aram (ENSI Si-mu-ur Dub-ul ENSI A-ra-meki ik-mi-ù) and in
a Sumerian administrative document, from the Ur-III period (c. -2000), which lists animal
brought to the central-park at Puzri"-Dagan (near Nippur) a city A-ra-miki is mentionned
after E"nuna. Archaeological and biblical data are consistent: the Arameans cattle breeders
114 J. FREU, R. LEBRUN – Histoire du Mitanni
Paris 2003 Éd. L'Harmattan pp. 40-51.
115 E. LIPINSKI – Paddân-Aram
in: Dictionnaire encyclopédique de la Bible (Brépols, 1987) p. 949.


117 D.D. LUCKENBILL – Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia I
Chicago 1926 Ed. University of Chicago Press §§ 73, 116, 166, 209.
Paris 1986 Éd. Gabalda pp.194-198.

A.T. C LAY – Documents from the Temple Archives of Nippur dated in the reigns of Cassite rulers
in: Babylonian Expedition (1906) Vol XIV p. 16; Vol XV pp. 44, 168.
119 E. LIPINSKI – The Aramaeans
in: Analecta 100, 2000, pp. 26-31.

were originally installed in Lower Mesopotamia (2200-1800) who later moved westward,
first in Upper Mesopotamia (1800-1500) and finally in Syria (after -1200).
The long journey of Abraham from Ur of Egypt is at the time of Sinuhe where
Orientals are called in Egyptian Aamu. For example, a text associated with Amenemhet I
(1975-1946) called “The Prophecy of Neferti”, makes mention of Asiatics: He (Neferti) was
concerned for what would happen in the land. He thinks about the condition of the east. Asiatics (‘3mw)
travel with their swords, terrorizing those who are harvesting, seizing the oxen from the plow (...) All
happiness has gone away, the land is cast down in trouble because of those feeders, Asiatics (Styw) who are
throughout the land. Enemies have arisen in the east, Asiatics (‘3mw) have come down to Egypt. A
fortress is deprived of another beside it, the guards do not pay attention of it (...) Asiatics (‘3mw) will fall
to his sword, Libyans will fall to this flame, rebels to his wrath, traitors to his might, as the serpent on his
brow subdues the rebels to him. One will build the “Wall of the Ruler”, life prosperity and health, to
prevent Asiatics (‘3mw) from going down into Egypt120. The Egyptian words Aamu (‘3mw) and
Retenu (Rtnw) are usually translated as "Asiatics" and "Syria-Palestine", they fit well to the
biblical terms "people of Canaan" and "Canaan". As the Execration Texts121 transcribe the
names Ascalon and Jerusalem by ’Isq3nw (A"qalun)122 and 3w"3mm ([U]rusalimum), the
Egyptian letter 3 being used for sound r/l (at least up to 1800 BCE), the word ‘3mw, could
be read Aramu "those of Aram". The Egyptian word Setiu (Styw) "those of Seth" is also
translated as "Asiatics", but refers more specifically to Suteans [of Moab], called "sons of
Seth" in the Bible (Numbers 24:17). When Idrimi (1500-1470) fled to the south of Syria, he
met the Sutu [Suteans], and then lived 7 years with the Habiru [Hebrews] in the country of
Ki-in-a-nimki [Canaan]123. This term Canaan, which is Semitic, does not appear in Egyptian
texts (except perhaps as 'Sand Dwellers')124, moreover, because of migration, it has
designated different areas according to the time: Lebanon at the time of Ebla, circa -2300
(the name Canaan appears in the sentences: kù nig-ba dBE(lum) Ga-na-na-im "gift (for) the
lord of Canaan"; é dGa-na-na-im "temple of divine Canaan")125, Upper Mesopotamia at the
time of Mari, c. -1800 (the name Canaan is written Ki-na-a!-nu)126, Syria-Palestine at the time
of Idrimi (c. -1500) and Philistia at the time of Merenptah (c. -1200).
As can be seen, accusations of anachronism are all false and dishonest. They are
false because an absence of evidence is not an evidence of absence and they are dishonest
because academics who publish this information deliberately ignore the evidence when they
are available as it is the case for Camels, the Philistines, the Hittites and the Arameans. In
fact we could reverse the questioning on the Bible: How to explain that the author of the
Pentateuch knew that, at the time of Abraham (c. -1950), camels were already domesticated
by the Arabs, the Philistines in Palestine came from Crete, the Hittites had settled in Syria
and that the Arameans had gradually migrated from Lower Mesopotamia to Upper
Mesopotamia and finally to Syria (c. -1500). In fact, the most vicious attack against the
Pentateuch scaffolded by Egyptologists, thanks to archaeologists, consisted in asserting that
it is a myth built from an insignificant “true story”, which happened in the 13th century and
120 J.K. HOFFMEIER – Israel in Egypt. The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition
New York 1996 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 58-59.
121 R. DUSSAUD – Nouveaux textes égyptiens d'exécration contre les peuples syriens
in: Syria 21:2 (1940) pp. 170-182.

122 Ascalon is written ’Isq3rwnw (instead of ’Isq3nw) during Amenhotep II's reign.
123 P. GARELLI, J.M. DURAND, H. GONNET, C. BRENIQUET - Le Proche-Orient Asiatique
Paris 1997 Éd. P.U.F. pp. 139-140.

124 Y. AHARONI, A.F. RAINEY – Land of the Bible. A historical geography
Philadelphia 1979 Ed. The Westminste Press pp. 67-77.

125 J.N. TUBB – Peoples of the Past. Canaanites
London 1998 Ed. British Museum p. 15.

A. ARCHI –The Head of Kura-The Head of ’Adabal
in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 64:2 (2005) pp. 81-100.
126 G. DOSSIN – Une mention des Cananéens dans une lettre de Mari
in: Syria n°50 1973, pp. 277-282.

was then embellished127. The historical core of the Exodus would come from a revolt of
Apiru (Hebrew) workers led by an Egyptian called Mes (Moses) under Ramses II. This
minor event would have been amalgamated with other important historical events such as
the explosion of Santorini and was finally written down much later, perhaps to the return
from the Babylonian exile128. It is amazing that this “fairy tale” was able to seduce so many
seasoned biblical scholars. There are yet many absurdities: 1) Ramses II died of old age
rather than abruptly in the Red Sea (Psalm 136:15), 2) his eldest son who was Crown Prince
(Exodus 12:29) did not die but simply changed his name129, 3) on the death of Ramses II
there has been no mass exodus of Semites from Egypt to Palestine (Numbers 1:46) and 4)
the Egyptians suffered no disaster that looks like the 10 plagues, 5) the Exodus is located
around 1500 BCE (1 Kings 6:1), not around 1250 BCE, and 6) the eruption of the
Santorini volcano is dated about 1625 BCE by dendrocronology130. The Exodus version
proposed by Egyptologists is therefore completely ludicrous. The only question that counts
for a scientific mind is the following: since several million Semites have stayed in Egypt for
at least 200 years before coming back to Palestine, what say exactly Egyptian documents
particularly on the dramatic end prior to the Exodus?
IS MOSES A MYTHICAL CHARACTER?
For some German Egyptologists, Moses would be a Jewish Freudian souvenir
inspired from the life of a heretic pharaoh as Akhenaten131 or a usurper as Amen-mes. Rolf
Krauss132 explained, for example: Two articles appeared in 1937, one under the title "Moses, an
Egyptian" and the other "If Moses was an Egyptian". In 1939, a few months before his death at the age
of 83, Freud brings together in one book Moses and Monotheism, both essays of 1937, increased by a
third, "Moses, his people and monotheism", in which he outlined a psycho-religious theory concerning the
origins of monotheism (...) from my side I has, as a researcher, to acquiesce in the conclusion of Freud. But
from the historical point of view, was he right making Moses an Egyptian (as Amon-Masesa)? (...) In fact,
all that teaches us the Pentateuch about Egypt could be inserted as late as the 3rd century by a narrator who
knew the country (...) it is important for us to know whether his story applied to the Hebrews, has a
historic core, ie if the Hebrews really evolved in the context described. For archeology, this historic core is not
true, and the texts themselves are not safe, since they were written centuries after the events allegedly
occurred. In such a situation, the conclusion is inescapable: the biblical narrative does not go back to old
legends formed around a historic core, but it is a fiction of later times. This iconoclastic conclusion
would not have been disowned by archaeologists of the Third Reich.
One can notice that Egyptian documents unanimously describe the departure of
the Hyksos from Egypt to Palestine in a disaster. No document speaks of war but only that
Avaris, Hyksos' capital, was looted and vandalized after their departure. Modern
Egyptologists133 suppose that: The Hyksos dynasty reigned a hundred years in Egypt (# 1650 #
1539), succumbing only after a struggle that was very difficult for Egyptian nationalist Pharaohs, whom at
least one of them was killed (Seqenenre Taa). Kamose began the liberation war, but it is Ahmose who
Cambridge 2003 Ed. W.B. Eerdmans pp. 299-312.
128 C. DESROCHES NOBLECOURT – Ramsès II. La véritable histoire
Paris 1996 Éd. Pygmalion Gérard Watelet pp. 248-256.

129 C. OBSOMER – Ramsès II
Paris 2012 Éd. Pygmalion pp. 265-270.

130 R. TREUIL, P. DARCQUE , J.-C. POURSAT, G. TOUCHAIS -Les Civilisations égéennes du Néolithique et de l'Âge du Bronze
Paris 2008 Éd. Presses universitaires de France p. 296.

131 J. ASSMAN – Moïse l'Égyptien
Paris 2001 Éd. Flammarion pp. 24, 29-33.

132 R. KRAUSS – Moïse le pharaon
Monaco 2005 Éd. Rocher pp.14-19,113-158, 201-208.

133 J. YOYOTTE – Dictionnaire des pharaons
Paris 1998 Éd. Noésis p. 85.

definitively eradicated the Hyksos domination by taking Avaris and Sharuhen. However all accounts
of former historians picture the Hyksos as the ancestors of the Hebrews, led into Palestine
under the leadership of Moses. In addition both biblical and Egyptian chronologies date
the Hyksos departure from Egypt to Palestine and the Exodus around 1530 BCE, which
implies the coincidence of these two dramatic events (see the file: Dating the war of the
Hyksos). Biblical and Egyptian chronologies agree perfectly (synchronisms are highlighted):
Israelite ruler period # 12th Dynasty reign # synchronism
Abraham 2038 - 175 Amenemhat I 1975 -
(in Egypt) 1963-1957 -1946 Founding of Tanis
- 1863
Jacob 1878 - 147 Neferusebek 1782-1778
-1731 13th Dynasty
Joseph 1788 - 110 1778-1573
(vizier) 1758-1744 Asiatics son of Hetepibre 1765 - Hyksos
-1678 -1679
15th Dynasty 1679 400 Stele of year 400
Chiefs of cattle 1678-1613 65 Great Hyksos 1679-1613 106 years (The
Moses (pharaoh) 1613-1573 40 Apopi 1613-1573 Histories II:128)
Moses (in Madian) 1573 - 40 17th Dynasty / 16th Dynasty
Rahotep 1573-1569
Sobekemsaf I 1569-1567
Sobekemsaf II 1567-1557
Antef VI 1557-1555
Antef VII 1555-1545
Antef VIII 1545-1545
Senakhtenre 1545-1544
-1533 Seqenenre Taa 1544-1533
Moses (Exodus) 1533 - 40 Kamose 1533-1530 War of the Hyksos
18th Dynasty
-1493 Ahmose 1530-1505
Joshua 1493 - 30 Amenhotep I 1505-1484
Thutmose I 1484-1472
-1463 Thutmose II 1472-1469
Without Judge 1463-1452 11 [Hatshepsut] [1469-1450]
Cushan-Rishataim 1452-1444 8 Thutmose III 1469-1418
Othniel 1444-1404 40 Amenhotep II 1420-1392
Eglon 1404-1386 18 Thutmose IV 1392-1383
Ehud/ Shamgar 1386-1366 20 Amenhotep III 1383-1345
Jabin/ (Sisera) 1366-1346 20 Akhenaton 1356 - War of the Apiru
Barak 1346 - 40 -1340
Semenkhkare 1340-1338
-Ankhkheperure 1338-1336
Tutankhamon 1336-1327
-1306 Aÿ 1327-1323
Madian 1306-1299 7 Horemheb 1323-1295
19th Dynasty
Gedeon 1299 - 40 Ramses I 1295-1294
Sety I 1294-1283
-1259 Ramses II 1283 -
Abimelek 1259-1256 3 (-1279)
Tola 1256-1233 23
Jair 1233-1211 22 -1216
Anarchy 1211 - 18 Merenptah 1216-1207 Stele of Israel
Sety II 1207-1202
[Amenmes] [1206-1202]
Siptah 1202-1196
-1193 -Tausert 1196-1194
The story of Manetho, an Egyptian priest (c. 280 BCE), is heavily influenced by the
Egyptian propaganda, but its chronological indications, without religious implications, are
usually quite accurate. For example, he wrote: When this people or shepherds were gone out of
Egypt to Jerusalem, Tethmosis the king of Egypt, who drove them out, reigned afterward 25 years and 4
months. Tethmosis (also written Thummosis) the first king of the 18th Dynasty, was Ahmose
and his father was Seqenenre Taa. This indisputable chronological benchmark provides the
following equivalences: Tethmosis/Thummosis = Ahmose; Misphragmuthosis = Seqenenre Taa;
Amenophis = Kamose; Apophis = Apopi; Osarsiph = Aauserre-Apopi; Salitis = Joseph?; Seth/
Typhon = The Lord of the land. According to these equivalences, Manetho's account is:
There was a king of ours whose name was Tutimaeus. Under him it came to pass (...) they made
one of themselves king, whose name was Joseph?; he also lived at Memphis (...) he found in the Sethroite
nome, a city very proper for this purpose, and which lay upon the Bubastic channel, but with regard to a
certain theologic notion was called Avaris (...) it was the Lord of the land's city (Against Apion I:75-78,
238). Joseph? reigned 19 years, Bnon reigned 44 years, Arpachan reigned 36 years and 7 months, Apopi
reigned 61 years, Jannas reigned 51 years and 1 month, Assis reigned 49 years and 2 months (I:79-81).
That under a king, whose name was Seqenenre, the Hyksos were subdued by him, and were indeed driven
out of other parts of Egypt, but were shut up in a place that contained 10,000 acres; this place was named
Avaris (I:86). Ahmose the son of Seqenenre made an attempt to take them by force and by siege, with
480,000 men to lie rotund about them, but that, upon his despair of taking the place by that siege, they
came to a composition with them, that they should leave Egypt, and go, without any harm to be done to
them, whithersoever they would; and that, after this composition was made, they went away with their whole
families and effects, not fewer in number than 240,000, and took their journey from Egypt, through the
wilderness, for Syria; but that as they were in fear of the Assyrians, who had then the dominion over Asia
(!), they built a city in that country which is now called Judea, and that large enough to contain this great
number of men, and called it Jerusalem (I:88-90). They [Hyksos] appointed themselves a ruler out of the
priests of Heliopolis, whose name was Aauserre-Apopi, and they took their oaths that they would be
obedient to him in all things. He then, in the first place, made this law for them, That they should neither
worship the Egyptian gods, nor should abstain from any one of those sacred animals which they have in the
highest esteem (...) When he had made such laws as these, and many more such as were mainly opposite to
the customs of the Egyptians, he gave order that they should use the multitude of the hands they had in
building walls about their City, and make themselves ready for a war with king Kamose, while he did
himself take into his friendship the other priests, and those that were polluted with them, and sent
ambassadors to those shepherds who had been driven out of the land by Ahmose to the city called Jerusalem
(...) (Kamose) marched into Ethiopia, together with his whole army and multitude of Egyptians; for the
king of Ethiopia was under an obligation to him, on which account he received him, and took care of all the
multitude that was with him, while the country supplied all that was necessary for the food of the men. He
also allotted cities and villages for this exile, that was to be from its beginning during those fatally
determined [1]3 years. Moreover, he pitched a camp for his Ethiopian army, as a guard to king Kamose,
upon the borders of Egypt (...) But for the people of Jerusalem, when they came down together with the
polluted Egyptians, they treated the men in such a barbarous manner, that those who saw how they subdued
the aforementioned country, and the horrid wickedness they were guilty of, thought it a most dreadful thing;
for they did not only set the cities and villages on fire but were not satisfied till they had been guilty of
sacrilege, and destroyed the images of the gods, and used them in roasting those sacred animals that used to
be worshipped, and forced the priests and prophets to be the executioners and murderers of those animals,
and then ejected them naked out of the country (I:238-241, 265-266). The priest, who ordained their
polity and their laws, was by birth of Heliopolis, and his name Aauserre-Apopi, from Osiris, who was the
god of Heliopolis; but that when he was gone over to these people, his name was changed, and he was called
Moses. After this, Kamose returned back from Ethiopia with a great army, as did his son Ahampses134
134 Kamose not seem to have had any son (?).
with another army also, and that both of them joined battle with the Hyksos and the polluted people, and
beat them, and slew a great many of them, and pursued them to the bounds of Syria (I:250, 265). When
this people or Hyksos were gone out of Egypt to Jerusalem, Ahmose the king of Egypt, who drove them out,
reigned afterward 25 years and 4 months (I:94, 231; II:16).
Manetho's story is very similar to that appearing on the stele of Kamose. It is
interesting to notice that Josephus disagreed with Manetho on a linguistic point concerning
the name of Moses: wherein he [Manetho] relates the change of his name, and says that "he was
formerly called Osarsiph;" and this a name no way agreeable to the other, while his true name was Moses,
and signifies a person who is preserved out of the water, for the Egyptians call water Mou (Against Apion
I:286). Thermuthis imposed this name Mouses upon him, from what had happened when he was put into
the river; for the Egyptians call water by the name of Mou, and such as are saved out of it, by the name of
Uses: so by putting these two words together, they imposed this name upon him (Antiquities of the Jews
II:238). Josephus was partly right, because the first part of Mouses' name meant "water
(mou)" in Egyptian, as confirmed Philo of Alexandria (De Vita Mosis I:17), however the
second part does not mean "saved out of it", but merely "son (s3)" in Egyptian, like in the
frequent expression "son of Ra (s3 r‘)". Ramses (r‘ mss) means "spawned by Sun god (Ra)",
Ahmose (I‘" ms) "spawned by Moon god (Iah)", Musa (mw s3) "son of Water (god Nile)",
because the names linked to the pharaoh are governed by honorific anteposition. For
example, the expression "like Ra" is written r‘-mi "Ra like", the word "king" pronounced
n(y)-sut is written sut-n(y). A lot has been written about the explanation of the name of
Moses. According to the biblical text it means "pulling out of [the water]", assuming an
unusual Hebrew form mashuy "being pulled out." This name is used in conjunction with the
people who would "be pulled out of [the water]" by the man who would become Mosheh
"pulling [his people out of the water] in Isaiah 63:11,12". The first vowel of the name
Moses is "o" in the Hebrew text and "ou" in the Greek text (Mouses), but never "a" or "e",
which prevents a reconciliation with the Egyptian word mes, meaning "spawned by", found
in the name Ra-mes-es. The biblical text has preserved the Egyptian vocalization of this
word in the name Ra-mes-es (Genesis 47:11), which is different from the Hebrew name
Mosheh. If the name of Moses came from the Egyptian mes, the biblical text would have
preserved this form, or would be likely Hebraicized in me" (Mesh)135. According to
Manetho's account, Osarseph's name came from Osiris, the god of Heliopolis ("city of the
sun", thus the god of Heliopolis was Ra). According to Chaeremon, director of the
Museum of Alexandria (c. 40 CE), the name of Joseph (in Egypt) was Peteseph (not Salitis)
and the name of Moses was Tisithen in Egypt (Against Apion I:290).
After the death of Joseph, as Hebrew people greatly increased (Exodus 1:7), the
viziers of the North received new responsibilities and became in fact co-regents (beginning
of the 15th Dynasty). It can be seen there is no more vizier after Sobekhotep IV (1686-
1677), a king of the 13th Dynasty, until Ahmose136 (1530-1505), first king of the 18th
Dynasty. Thus, Moses was born during the 15th dynasty: She conceived and gave birth to a son.
When she saw how good-looking he was, she kept him concealed for 3 months (...) Now Pharaoh's
daughter went down to bathe in the Nile river, while her maids walked along the riverside. Among the reeds
she noticed the basket, and she sent her maid to fetch it. She opened it and saw the child: the baby was
crying. Feeling sorry for it, she said: This is one of the little Hebrews. The child's sister then said to
Pharaoh's daughter: Shall I go and find you a nurse among the Hebrew women to nurse the child for you?
Yes, said Pharaoh's daughter, and the girl went and called the child's own mother. Pharaoh's daughter said
to her: Take this child away and nurse it for me. I shall pay you myself for doing so. So the woman took
135 The exchange between s and " is very frequent (but not understood). For example, the Egyptian name Amen-mes is rendered by
Aman-ma"a in Akkadian (letter EA 113), and the famous Ra‘-messu (Ramses) is rendered by Ria-ma"e"a (Hattusili treaty with Ramses).
136 M. DESSOUDEIX – Chronique de l'Égypte ancienne
Paris 2008 Éd. Actes Sud pp. 728-732.

the child away and nursed it. When the child grew up, she brought him to Pharaoh's daughter who treated
him like a son; she named him Moses because, she said: I drew him out of the water (Exodus 2:2-10).
As Pharaoh's daugther was not able to speak Hebrew, the name Moses must be Egyptian.
One can notice that in Hebrew this name probably means "pulled out (mosheh)" (the word
"water" is missing), whereas in Egyptian it means "Water's son (mu-sa)". Moses did not
receive this Egyptian name from his parents, but from Pharaoh's daughter after his
"baptism" in the Nile. As it was received after the age of 3 months (the text of Exodus 2:10
even suggests after his weaning), it was therefore a nickname and not a birth name (like
Israel is the nickname for Jacob, his birth name). The name of Hebrew children was given
by parents based on a striking condition at birth. As Moses was beautiful at his birth, which
is emphasized by biblical texts (Exodus 2:2) as by Josephus (Jewish Antiquities II:231),
"divinely beautiful" according to Acts 7:20, he had to be called "very beautiful". In Hebrew
"beautiful" is rendered as Ioppa (Joshua 19:46) and "splendid" as iepepiah (Jeremiah 46:20).
Moses was adopted as king's son through Pharaoh's daughter (Exodus 2:10).
Adoption in the royal family conferred its holder the honorific title of "king's son." If the
daughter of Pharaoh had more prestigious position of "Wife of the god", she was able to
confer dynastic position to his son who could be considered not just as king, what were
already the kings of the 15th Dynasty, but as a real co-regent. Some Egyptian accounts show
that women of royal origin could play an important role in the choice of future pharaohs.
According to Flavius Josephus: Thermuthis therefore perceiving him to be so remarkable a child,
adopted him for her son, having no child of her own. And when one time had carried Moses to her father,
she showed him to him, and said she thought to make him her successor, if it should please God she should
have no legitimate child of her own; and to him: I have brought up a child who is of a divine form, and of a
generous mind; and as I have received him from the bounty of the river, in, I thought proper to adopt him
my son, and the heir of thy kingdom. And she had said this, she put the infant into her father's hands: so
he took him, and hugged him to his breast; and on his daughter's account, in a pleasant way, put his
diadem upon his head; but Moses threw it down to the ground, and, in a puerile mood, he wreathed it
round, and trod upon his feet, which seemed to bring along with evil presage concerning the kingdom of
Egypt. But when the sacred scribe saw this, (he was the person who foretold that his nativity would the
dominion of that kingdom low,) he made a violent attempt to kill him; and crying out in a frightful manner,
he said: This, O king! this child is he of whom God foretold, that if we kill him we shall be in no danger;
he himself affords an attestation to the prediction of the same thing, by his trampling upon thy government,
and treading upon thy diadem. Take him, therefore, out of the way, and deliver the Egyptians from the fear
they are in about him; and deprive the Hebrews of the hope they have of being encouraged by him. But
Thermuthis prevented him, and snatched the child away. And the king was not hasty to slay him, God
himself, whose providence protected Moses, inclining the king to spare him. He was, therefore, educated with
great care (Jewish Antiquities II:232-233). The text of Josephus on the royal status of Moses
is often considered a legend by archeologists although these details were known from 280
BCE thanks to Manetho. Strabo, a Greek geographer and historian, wrote for example
around 20 CE: An Egyptian priest named Moses, who possessed [managed] a portion of the country
called the Lower [Egypt]137, being dissatisfied with the established institutions there, left it and came to
Judea with a large body of people who worshipped the Divinity (Geography XVI:2:35).
The biblical text speaks little of the royal position of Moses during the first 40 years
of his life, but one can guess implicitly in the following texts: The man Moses too was very great
in the land of Egypt, in the eyes of Pharaoh’s servants and in the eyes of the people (Exodus 11:3); the
daughter of Pharaoh picked him up and brought him up as her own son. Consequently Moses was
instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. In fact, he was powerful in his words and deeds (Acts 7:21-
22); By faith Moses, when grown up, denied to be called the son of the daughter of Pharaoh, choosing to be
137 !"#$% &'( )*% )+, -.&/0)1", 23(4", 56", )* 74(8% )$% {9')"} 9:;8/74,<% 6=(:%.
ill-treated with the people of God rather than to have the temporary enjoyment of sin, because he esteemed
the reproach of the Christ as riches greater than the treasures of Egypt (Hebrews 11:24-26).
Renunciation of Moses to the treasures of Egypt makes sense only if he really got them
thanks to his royal status. Something can be denied only if it has been owned. However, his
leading position has been challenged by some Hebrews: he (Moses) went out on the following day
and here there were two Hebrew men struggling with each other. So he said to the one in the wrong: Why
should you strike your companion? At this he said: Who appointed you as a prince and judge over us? Are
you intending to kill me just as you killed the Egyptian? (Exodus 2:13-14). As Moses could inflict
death penalty to the Hebrews, that implies his royal authority.
Moses was co-regent for 40 years, from 1613 to 1573 BCE, for exactly the same
duration as Apopi, then: Now when the time of his 40th year was being fulfilled, it came into his heart
to make an inspection of his brothers, the sons of Israel (Acts 7:23). Now it came about in those days, as
Moses was becoming strong, that he went out to his brothers that he might look at the burdens they were
bearing; and he caught sight of a certain Egyptian striking a certain Hebrew of his brothers. So he turned
this way and that and saw there was nobody in sight. Then he struck the Egyptian down and hid him in
the sand (...) Moses now got afraid and said: Surely the thing has become known! Subsequently Pharaoh
got to hear of this thing, and he attempted to kill Moses; but Moses ran away from Pharaoh that he might
dwell in the land of Madian; and he took a seat by a well (Exodus 2:11, 15). About this new period
of 40 years (1573-1533), since Moses lived 120 years (Deuteronomy 34:7) and spent 40
years in the wilderness (Deuteronomy 8:2), very few is known. One can assume that Moses
was well known at that time under his birth name Apopi (or under his last enthronement
name Aauserre). Thus, to avoid being recognized he had to hide his identity and has
probably used his ‘baptismal’ name Musa unknown outside Egypt, Hebraized into Mu"a
(for example, the name Amen-mes is rendered Aman-ma"a in the Akkadian El-Amarna
letter n° 113). We note that after King Apopi, the last great Hyksos, the following Hyksos
dynasty changed its capital, Edfu, north of Thebes (centre of the war of liberation against
the Hyksos)138, instead of Avaris and that all kings of this 16th dynasty beard only Egyptian
names. During this long period the king of Egypt died. The Israelites, groaning in their servitude, cried out
for help and from the depths of their servitude their cry came up to God (Exodus 2:23).
The last 40 years of Moses (1533-1493) are the best known: God further said to Moses,
You are to tell the Israelites (...) They will listen to your words, and you and the elders of Israel are to go to
the king of Egypt and say to him: Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, has encountered us. So now please
allow us to make a 3-days' journey into the desert and sacrifice to Yahweh our God. I am well aware that
the king of Egypt will not let you go unless he is compelled by a mighty hand; he will not let you go until I
have stretched out my arm and struck Egypt with all the wonders I intend to work there. I shall ensure that
the Egyptians are so much impressed with this people that when you go, you will not go empty-handed.
Every woman will ask her neighbour and the woman staying in her house for silver and golden jewellery,
and clothing. In these you will dress your own sons and daughters, despoiling the Egyptians of them (...) So
Moses took his wife and his son and, putting them on a donkey, started back for Egypt (...) [God said:]
You will then say to Pharaoh: (Exodus 3:16-22; 4:20-22). The fact that Moses could easily go
and talk to Pharaoh proved that he was an important figure. However, the context is
complicated because Moses had to discuss with Egyptian officials (17th dynasty) and with
Jewish officers (16th dynasty) totally subservient to Pharaoh: So those who drove the people to
work and their officers [16th Dynasty] went out and said to the people: Here is what Pharaoh has said: I
am giving You no more straw. You yourselves go, get straw for yourselves wherever You may find it, because
there is to be no reducing of Your services one bit. Consequently the people scattered about over all the land
of Egypt to gather stubble for straw. And those who drove them to work kept urging them, saying: Finish
138 E.D. OREN - The Hyksos Enygma — Introductory Overview
in: The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (Philadelphia 1997) p. 12
Your works, each one his work, day for day, just as when straw was available. Later on the officers of the
sons of Israel [16th Dynasty], whom Pharaoh’s taskmasters [17th Dynasty] had set over them, were beaten,
these saying: Why is it You did not finish Your prescribed task in making bricks as formerly, both
yesterday and today? Consequently the officers of the sons of Israel [16th Dynasty] went in and began to cry
out to Pharaoh, saying: Why do you deal this way with your servants? There is no straw given to your
servants and yet they are saying to us: ‘Make bricks!’ and here your servants are beaten, whereas your own
people are at fault. But he said: You are relaxing, You are relaxing! That is why You are saying: We
want to go, we want to sacrifice to Jehovah. And now go, serve! Though no straw will be given to You, yet
You are to give the fixed amount of bricks. Then the officers of the sons of Israel [16th Dynasty] saw
themselves in an evil plight at the saying: You must not deduct from Your bricks one bit of anyone’s daily
rate. After that they encountered Moses [former king of the 15th Dynasty] and Aaron, who were standing
there to meet them as they came out from Pharaoh. At once they said to them: May Jehovah look upon You
and judge, since You have made us smell offensive before Pharaoh [17th Dynasty] and before his servants so
as to put a sword in their hand to kill us (Exodus 5:10-21).
Some Jewish officers of the 16th Dynasty refused to cooperate with Moses and even
opposed him: Now in the way that Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so these also go on resisting the
truth, men completely corrupted in mind, disapproved as regards the faith (2 Timothy 3:8). The
precision: « disapproved as regards the faith » proves that they were Jewish rulers, not
Egyptian priests. According to the Jewish literature of the first century, Jannes and his
brother Jambres opposed Moses under the influence of Belial
(Damascus Document 5:18-19). According to Manetho,
Jannas ruled as king (16th Dynasty) after Apopi. The name
Jeneses-adon (y-n-s-s idn) appears (opposite figure) on an
inscription at Avaris139 indicating he was the son of Khyan,
the Hyksos king (15th Dynasty) before Apopi.
The episode of the 10 plagues of Egypt is famous. A painstaking reconstruction140
shows that it lasted about 40 days, from month XII day 1 to month I day 14 (1533 BCE):
N° Date Julian Plague Reference
1 7/XII March 18 Water to blood Exodus 7:14-25
2 15/XII March 26 Frogs Exodus 8:1-7
3 18/XII March 29 Lice Exodus 8:16-19
4 20/XII March 31 Flies Exodus 8:24-29
5 23/XII April 3 Murrain Exodus 9:6
6 25/XII April 5 Boils Exodus 9:8-12
7 27/XII April 7 Hail and Fire Exodus 9:22-26
28/XII April 8 Barley and flax smitten Exodus 9:31
8 2/I April 12 Locust Exodus 10:13-15
9 5/I April 13 Darkness for 3 days Exodus 10:21-23
10/I April 20 Passover lamb selected Exodus 12:28
10 14/I April 24 Passover. Death of the firstborn. Exodus 12:29-36
30/I May 10 Death of Pharaoh Exodus 14:7-28
According to the biblical text: And at midnight Yahweh struck down all the first-born in
Egypt from the first-born of Pharaoh, heir to his throne, to the first-born of the prisoner in the dungeon, and
the first-born of all the livestock. Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up in the night,
and there was great wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without its dead. It was still dark when
Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said: Up, leave my subjects, you and the Israelites! Go and
worship Yahweh as you have asked (Exodus 12:29-31). The remark « from the first-born of
139 M. BIETAK - Avaris the Capital of the Hyksos
London 1996 Ed. British Museum Press pp. 64-67.
140 F. NOLEN JONES – The Chronology of the Old Testament
Texas 2005 Ed. Master Books p. 70.

Pharaoh, heir to his throne » shows that this anonymous Pharaoh had (at least) a son who
was Crown prince. The final sequence of events is precisely dated. Exodus began on 15/I
1533 BCE from Rameses a storage city (unidentified), which was the ancient Egyptian
Babylon (Fustat, near Old Cairo) according to Josephus (Jewish Antiquities II:315).
Israelites followed the path of the desert (from Memphis to the mines of Serabit el-
Khadim) and not Philistines' way141, named path of Horus by the Egyptians, along the
Mediterranean coast to camp at Sukkhot, then Etham before finally returning to
Pihahiroth142 (Exodus 13:17-14:2). This town was to be located north of the Red Sea as
described by Josephus (Jewish Antiquities II:324-326) and could be the present jebel 'Ataqa
(the site actually looks like a dead end). The pharaoh died during the crossing of the Red
Sea143 (Psalm 136:15), and the Israelites reached Elim (current Gharandel wadi) on the 15th
of the following month (Exodus 16:1). The route between Memphis and Elim is round 600
kilometres, the distance can be covered in approximately 24 days144, which corresponds to
30 days indicated in the text145. Current crossing between the promontory called Ras ‘Ataqa
to the oasis Ayun Musa, on the opposite bank is about 10 km which requires a period of at
least 2 hours to get from the bottom of a bank to another. The maximum depth is 15
meters in the middle of the path, which is consistent with the biblical description: The
Israelites went on dry ground right through the sea, with walls of water to right and left of them (Exodus
14:22). To avoid miraculous explanation some biblical scholars propose a simple swamps
crossing, but in this case the path would be either impractical for a large crowd or without
danger for the Egyptian armies.
The departure from Egypt is dated 15 Nisan (Numbers 33:3). Since the arrival in
the desert of Sin is dated the 15th of the following month (Exodus 16:1) and the final
showdown is near Pihahiroth (Exodus 14:9) place halfway between the city called Rameses
and the desert of Sin, the date marking the death of the Pharaoh can be fixed Nisan 30/1
Iyyar, on 9/10 May 1533 BCE. Flavius Josephus gives chronological details on this
important event: a thick darkness, without the least light, spread itself over the Egyptians, whereby their
sight being obstructed, and their breathing hindered by the thickness of the air, they died miserably, and
under a terror lest they should be swallowed up by the dark cloud. Besides this, when the darkness, after 3
days and as many nights, was dissipated, (...) But when God had signified, that with one plague he would
compel the Egyptians to let Hebrews go, he commanded Moses to tell the people that they should have a
sacrifice ready, and they should prepare themselves on the 10th day of the month Xanthicus, against the 14th,
(which month is called by the Egyptians Pharmouthi, Nisan by the Hebrews; but the Macedonians call it
Xanthicus,) and that he should carry the Hebrews with all they had (...) the whole Egyptian army was
within it, the sea flowed to its own place, and came down with a torrent raised by storms of wind, and
encompassed the Egyptians. Showers of rain also came down from the sky, and dreadful thunders and
lightning, with flashes of fire. Thunderbolts also were darted upon them. Nor was there any thing which
used to be sent by God upon men, as indications of his wrath, which did not happen at this time, for a dark
and dismal night oppressed them. And thus did all these men perish, so that there was not one man left to
be a messenger of this calamity to the rest of the Egyptians (Jewish Antiquities II:308-311, 343-344).
The equivalence: 1st Pharmouthi (IV Peret 1) = 1st Nisan, is possible only around 1530
BCE. The ‘dark and dismal night’ that occurred on April 14 was a total solar eclipse.
141 It seems that if the Israelites had taken the ways of Horus in the open, they could easily return to Egypt in seeing the army of Pharaoh
pursuing them.
142 Pihahiroth name could come from Old Canaanite pi !irîtu "mouth of the channel."
143 It is in fact the old Sea of Reeds north of the Red Seabecause the Greek text (Acts 7:36, Hebrews 11:29) always translates the Hebrew
words yam-suph "Sea of Reeds" by erythra thalassa "Red Sea".

144 The armies of the past moved at an average speed to 25 km per day. Even the Roman armies, highly organized, did not exceed this
speed (E. LUTTWAK – La grande stratégie de l'Empire romain. Paris 2009 Éd. Economica p. 137).
145 Departure from Ramses (near Memphis) on Nisan 15, arrival at Succoth on 21, departure on 23, arrival at Etham on 27, departure on
29, arrival at Pihahiroth on 30, departure on 1 next month, arrival at Mara on 8 and departure on 13, arrived at Elim on 15.
The total solar eclipse on 15/II was enclosed with the violent storm that occurred
at the same time: The waters have seen you, O God, the waters have seen you; they began to be in severe
pains. Also, the watery deeps began to be agitated. The clouds have thunderously poured down water; A
sound the cloudy skies have given forth. Also, your own arrows proceeded to go here and there. The sound of
your thunder was like chariot wheels; Lightnings have lighted up the productive land; The earth became
agitated and began to rock. Through the sea your way was, and your path was through many waters; And
your very footprints have not come to be known. You have led your people just like a flock, by the hand of
Moses and Aaron (Psalm 77:17-20). The text of Ezekiel mentions the tragic end of a pharaoh
and associates it with a cloudy sky and a solar eclipse: Son of man, lift up a dirge concerning
Pharaoh the king of Egypt, and you must say to him: As a manned young lion of nations you have been
silenced. And you have been like the marine monster in the seas [crocodile], and you kept gushing in your
rivers and kept muddying the waters with your feet and fouling their rivers (...) And when you get
extinguished I will cover [the] heavens and darken their stars. As for [the] sun, with clouds I shall cover it,
and [the] moon itself will not let its light shine. All the luminaries of light in the heavens — I shall darken
them on your account, and I will put darkness upon your land (Ezekiel 32:2, 7-8). This text targets
the Pharaoh of the Exodus, the only one known for ending tragically (Psalm 136:15),
because the term "crocodile dragon or marine monster" always refers to this ruder (Isaiah
51:9-10) as an avatar of the sliding snake, Leviathan (Isaiah 27:1, Ezekiel 29:2-5, Psalms
74:13-14) and not Apries, the Pharaoh of that time. Indeed, in this case, the Pharaoh is
named (Jeremiah 44:30). This process of assimilation between two rulers from different
eras is found again with the king of Tyre who was assimilate to the original serpent in Eden
(Ezekiel 28:12-14). The expression: All the luminaries of light in the heavens — I shall darken them
on your account, and I will put darkness upon your land has a symbolic meaning, but could be
understood only if it had also a literal meaning. The Pharaoh was considered a living god
by the Egyptians, the son of the sun god Ra, thus the solar eclipse as the moonless night
had to mark them.
According to astronomy, the only total solar eclipse in this region during this period
(1600-1500)146 was the one dated May 10, 1533 BCE147, magnitude 1.08, it covered a strip
of 250 km and was visible in the North of Egypt over several cities like Heliopolis
(dedicated to sun worship), Memphis and Heracleopolis, to 4:40 p.m. and lasted more than
6 minutes (the place called Pihahiroth "mouth of the canal" should be near As Suways).
Chronological information from the biblical text (death of Pharaoh dated May 10,
1533 BCE), from Josephus (14 Nisan = 14 Pharmouthi around 1530 BCE), from the
Rhind papyrus (Avaris evacuated during I Shemu 1533 BCE) and from astronomy (total
solar eclipse on May 10, 1533 BCE) coincide remarkably well:
146 http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SE-1599--1500.html
147 http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsearch/SEsearchmap.php?Ecl=-15320510
Israelite calendar Julian (1533 BCE) Egyptian calendar Event

23 Adar (23/XII) 3 April (spring equinox) III Peret 26 (26 Phamenoth)
1 Nisan ( 1/I) 11 April IV Peret 4 ( 4 Pharmouthi)
14 Nisan (14/I) 24 April (full moon) IV Peret 17 (17 Pharmouthi) Death of Ahmose Sapaïr
15 Nisan (15/I) 25 April IV Peret 18 (18 Pharmouthi) Avaris evacuated, then sacked
30 Nisan (30/I) 10 May (total solar eclipse) I Shemu 3 ( 3 Pakhons) Death of Seqenenre Taa
29 Iyyar (29/II) 7 June II Shemu 1 ( 1 Payni) [Kamose] arrived in Heliopolis
2 October I Akhet 23 (23 Thot) Tjaru sacked by Kamose
Events following the

exodus from Egypt are few.
According to the biblical text, due
to a lack of faith, entry into Canaan,
which would start from year 2
(Numbers 1:1) was delayed 40 years
(Numbers 14:29-34). Some
Israelites try entering the land of
Canaan despite the divine refusal,
but they were defeated by
Amalekites in the south of Palestine
(Numbers 14:34-45), probably in
the Hyksos area near Sharuhen
(Tell el-‘Ajjul).
There is no consensus whatever as to the function(s) of scarab seals, however it
seems reasonable to assume that the demonstrable cultural intimacy between southern
Levantine city-states such as Pella or Sharuhen and the Hyksos Kingdom grew on the back
of a flourishing economic relationship148.
Year [A] [B] [C]
-1534 8 V XII 79 [A] Pharaoh [Seqenenre]
9 VI I 11 [B] Crown Prince [Ahmose Sapaïr]
10 VII II 80
11 VIII III [C] Moses was 80 years old when he came into Egypt. He
12 IX IV was a former pharaoh 40 years earlier.
-1533 1 X V
2 XI VI 0 Beginning of the 10 plagues
3 XII VII
4 I VIII *** 1 [B] Death of the Crown Prince (who was a first-born)
5 II IX *** (1) [A] Death of the Pharaoh
6 III X (1) [B] Prince of Thebes [Kamose]
7 IV XI
8 V XII
9 VI I (2) [C] Year 1 of the Exodus (departure to Paletine)
10 VII II
11 VIII III
12 IX IV
-1532 1 X V
2 XI VI
3 XII VII
4 I VIII 2 [C] Year 2 of the Exodus
5 II IX (2)
6 III X
7 IV XI *** Israelites defeated by Amalekites in the south of Palestine.
8 V XII Exodus for 40 years in Sinai (Egypt)
9 VI I (3)
10 VII II
148S.J. BOURKE, K.O. ERIKSSON – Pella in Jordan, Royal Name Scarabs and the Hyksos Empire
in: Timelines Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak Vol. II (2006) pp. 339-348.
DID MOSES WRITE THE PENTATEUCH?

For archaeologists Moses, if he ever existed (sic), could not write the Pentateuch
because the paleo-Hebrew only appeared after circa 1050 BCE149, at Byblos, and scribal
schools in Palestine only began to exist circa 800 BCE150. According to Finkelstein: Modern
archeology has shown that the concept of archives kept in Jerusalem with writings of the tenth century, is an
absurdity based on a biblical witness and not on factual evidence. Bible stories would rank therefore among
national mythologies, and would have no more historical foundation that Homeric saga of Ulysses, or that
of Aeneas, founder of Rome, sung by Virgil151. These statements and these dates are historically
grotesque since these authors are well aware that the Semites who came from Egypt and
lived in Palestine knew the old writing called proto-Canaanite152, the ancestor of Old
Hebrew. For example, several inscriptions in proto-Canaanite have been discovered in
Egypt (Serabit el-Khadim in Sinai and Wadi el-%ôl153 north of Thebes) and in Palestine
(Lachish, Gezer and Shechem). These inscriptions are difficult to date, between 1850 and
1500 BCE for Serabit el-Khadim and 1600-1500 for those in Palestine. However, the oldest
epigraphs in paleo-Hebrew are dated 1550-1480154. One has to notice (below) that this
latter example comes from a professional scribe who inscribed his name in cuneiform: Ali-
dîn-ili of Kup[patu?] (a-lí-di-in-ì-lí "a ku-up-[pa-tu? "high building"]) and engraved it in paleo-
Hebrew as: ’LDN’L GB‘ (Alidinel of Gaba "hill?") on the edge of the tablet. This paleo-
Hebrew script (1) is close to that yet much later (c. 950 BCE) found at Tel Zayit155 (2):
’ L D N ’ L G B ‘
From its discovery (in 2005) the Tel Zayit Abecedary served as evidence supporting
the notion of widespread literacy in ancient Israel during the 10th century156 because of two
reasons: 1) the increasing number of paleo-Hebrew inscriptions discovered in the period
dated 1100-1000 BCE (at least six) and 2) the regularity of writing of these inscriptions that
is possible only if there were schools of scribes157. Some schools of scribes have likely been
organized by King David because it is from his reign that appear king's secretaries as:
Shavsha (1Chronicles 18:16), Sherayah (2Samuel 8:17), Shisha (1Kings 4:3), Sheva (2Samuel
20:25), Elihoreph and Ahijah (1Kings 4:3). David himself was able writing a letter to Joab,
his chief of the army (2Samuel 11:14-15). Writing was so widespread at his time that King
149 J.F. HEALEY – Consolidation de l'alphabet et extension vers l'Ouest
in: La naissance des écritures du cunéifore à l'alphabet (Seuil, 1994), pp. 281-284.
150 D.W. JAMIESON-DRAKE – Scribes and Schools in Monarchic Judah: A Socio-Archeological Approach
Sheffiel 1991, Ed. Sheffield University Press pp. 11-47.

151 I. FINKELSTEIN – Le grand roi? Rien qu'un potentat local

I. FINKELSTEIN, N.A. SILBERMAN - La Bible dévoilée
Paris 2002 Éd. Bayard pp. 51-53.
152 A. LEMAIRE – Les «Hyksos» et les débuts de l'écriture alphabétique au Proche-Orient
in: Des signes pictographiques à l'alphabet (Karthala, 2000) pp.103-133.

153 J. COLEMAN DARNELL, F.W. DOBBS-ALLSOPP , M.J. LUNDBERG, P. KYLE MCCARTER, B. ZUCKERMAN – Two Early Alphabetic
Inscriptions from the Wadi el-%ôl in: The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 59 (2005), pp. 73-110.
154 S. DALLEY – Babylonian Tablets from the First Sealand Dynasty in the Schøyen Collection
in: Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology Vol. 9 (CDL Press, 2009) pp. 1-16, 112, plates LIII, CLIIV.
155 L. COLONNA D'ISTRIA – Babylonian Tablets from the First Sealand Dynasty in the Schøyen Collection
in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires N°3 (2012) pp. 61-63.

156 C.A. ROLLSTON – The Phoenician Script of the Tel Zayit Abecedary and Putative Evidence for Israelite Literacy
in: Literate Culture and Tenth-Century Canaan: The Tel Zayit Abecedary in Context (Eisenbrauns, 2008), pp. 61-96.
157 D.M. C ARR – The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New Reconstruction
2011 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 360-385.

Solomon warns: As regards anything besides these, my son, take a warning: To the making of many
books there is no end, and much devotion [to them] is wearisome to the flesh (Ecclesiastes 12:12). The
findings about schools of scribes during the 10th century are interesting (but recent) as they
show the stupidity of Finkelstein's claims, however these paleographers continue teaching
that the documents in paleo-Hebrew prior to 1100 BCE did not exist and that the
references to this writing at the time of Moses (Deuteronomy 31:24, Joshua 1:8; 10:13) are
not credible. However, as explained the Bible d'Alexandrie in its note on Judges 5:14 158
which mentions some enumerator scribes, without such professional major censuses, as
those quoted in Numbers 1:1-19, 20:2-63, would have been impossible to perform. There
was not only professional scribes who could write because even a young man (anonymous)
at the time of Gideon (1299-1259) was able to write 77 names (Judges 8:14).
Denigration of biblical texts by archaeologists is based primarily on the following
fallacy: "the current lack of archaeological evidence is evidence of the lack of historical evidence". It is
important to understand why this reasoning (mainly from 1970)159 is false because it is the
"cornerstone" of archaeologists whereas for historians today it is the testimony of early
historians. First, one must know that the complete disappearance of past things, including
some impressive buildings of stone, is the rule and not the exception, even the main capital
of the first empire of Akkad (Aggade) has still not been found. Major periods of history,
like the one that followed the attack of the Peoples of the Sea and lasted 400 years (1150-
750) are called "Dark Ages" because they are completely empty of written documents. The
kings of Elamite empire, for example, "disappear" completely out of the history for more
than three centuries (1100-770) and although the Etruscan civilization is newer and has
prospered from 750 to 300 BCE we do not have any literature. Indeed, there is currently
no document datable from the period of the Judges (1500-1000) but it should be noted, by
way of comparison, that the famous Kassite dynasty, which also lasted five centuries (1650-
1150), left no text and yet it was far more powerful than the Jewish jurisdiction.
How to explain that a known writing could disappear for several centuries without
leaving any archeological trace. For example, the Elamite cuneiform was used from 22nd to
4th centuries BCE160 but its disappearance during the period 1100-770 BCE was caused by a
massive arrival of Indo-Aryan tribes which has upset the Elamite empire leading to a
relocation of its capital at Susa161 (instead of Anshan). It is obvious that the Elamite writing
did not disappear but as chancelleries ceased to produce documents in large quantities, due
to disturbances in the empire, the number of documents of this period that survived today
has decreased drastically to reach virtually zero (the proportion of contemporaneous
documents that are found is probably less than one in a thousand)162. For the same reasons
when the Babylonian empire was destroyed by the Hittites (in 1499 BCE) it was replaced
by a small provincial Kassite kingdom without Chancery, and therefore without written
documents (we know Kassite kings only through later Babylonian scribes). The appearance
of a writing is in fact closely linked to the activities of a Chancery. A second factor has
played a significant role (poorly known): the perishable nature (or not) of support.
Two well-known writings, Egyptian hieroglyph and Babylonian cuneiform, allow to
understand the role of chancelleries and support of scriptures. The Babylonian cuneiform
158 P. HARLÉ, T. ROQUEPLO – Bible d'Alexandrie LXX 7. Les Juges
Paris 1999 Éd. Cerf pp. 121-122.
159 P. COURBIN – Qu'est-ce que l'archéologie?
Paris 1982 Éd. Payot pp. 121-220.

160 F. GRILLOT-SUSINI – L'élamite. Éléments de grammaire
Paris 2008 Éd. Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner p. 9.


162 Thus most ancient writers are not known anymore, except sometimes their names, because their works were now lost. Josephus, for
example, cites many former authors who then fell into anonymity.
writing is particularly well suited to clay tablets which have the property of not being
perishable. However, although the first Sumerian dynasty of Kish I (beginning c. 2800
BCE) preceded the Akkadian dynasty of Uruk I (beginning c. 2500 BCE) the first
cuneiform inscription « Me-bara[ge]-si, king [of Ki]sh163 » appears only from the 22nd king of
Kish I, called Me-barage-si (2500-2485) who was a contemporary of the first king of Uruk I
called Mes-ki’agga"er (2496-2490). Some tablets dated stratigraphically prior -2500 are only
accounting documents (i.e. inventories or lists of offerings). According to Berossus164, a
Babylonian priest (c. 280 BCE): At the beginning of the reign of Alorus [supposed to be the first
Mesopotamian king] Oannes [Adapa] emerged from the Persian Gulf and taught the skills needed to write
and calculate and for all kinds of knowledge: how to build cities, to found temples and make laws, and the
epic entitled "Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta" reads: Because the messenger's mouth was too
"heavy" and he could not repeat (the message), the lord of Kullab [En-merkar] modeled clay and made to
stand as a word on a shelf. Before that day, it was not possible to fit the words into the clay. But then when
the sun came up that day, it was done: the lord of Kullab words did stand on a shelf — it was done! In
fact, these two quotes are complementary since En-merkar (2490-2483), who is presented
as the first writer just prior to the 5th king of Uruk I, Gilgamesh (2461-2401), was actually
the 2nd king of Uruk I. Cuneiform writing appears therefore at the same time as the first
Akkadian chancellery. The Sumerian chancellery had to exist, otherwise we would not
know the first royal list with the names and durations of reign of the 21 kings before En-
Mebaragesi, but this chancery had not to establish diplomatic ties with other cities. The
Egyptian hieroglyphic writing is particularly well suited to papyrus which have the property
of being perishable except in Egypt (and around the Dead Sea) because of very low
humidity. The first hieroglyphs appear on some label indicating the name of the First
Dynasty pharaohs and some words in hieratic appear on ostraca of the IIIrd Dynasty. Then
at the end of the Vth Dynasty, appear the first texts in hieratic (Djedkarâ Isesi) and
hieroglyphic (pyramid of Unas). As livestock censuses began in the early dynasties
(beginning c. 2800 BCE), Egyptian chancelleries had to be operational from that time.
The emergence of foreign writing in Near Eastern kingdoms is more complicated
to date for at least three reasons: 1) their chancelleries were much smaller than those of
Egyptian and Babylonian empires (even the chancelleries of Elamite Empire adopted the
Babylonian cuneiform, from Sargon of Akkad, to record their language. It was not anymore
the native language of Canaanite scribes165), 3) the language used by these chancelleries was
the standard Babylonian written on tablets from the reign of Hammurabi (1697-1654) and
3) the support of writing used by most countries for their own language, like Aramaic
(Syian states) or Old Canaanite (Phoenician states), was papyrus and parchment which do
not keep long in these regions. The Assyrian Empire is a good example of this complexity.
From Tiglat-pileser I (1115-1076) who made vassal several Phoenician states, Assyrian
chancelleries adopted Aramaic as a second diplomatic language beside Babylonian. Clay
tablets were used for writing cuneiform (mainly Babylonian and Assyrian languages) and
scrolls for Aramaic (language of the rest of the empire). These scribes166 were called in
Akkadian #up"arru, from the Sumerian word DUB-SAR "tablet-write," and sepîru, translating
the Sumerian KU!-SAR "skin-write".
163 E. SOLLBERGER, J.-R. KUPPER – Inscriptions royales sumériennes et akkadiennes
Paris 1971 Éd. Cerf pp. 39-40,130-131.
R.J. TOURNAY, A. SHAFFER – L'épopée de Gilgamesh
Paris 1994 Éd. Cerf pp. 7-10.
164 D. CHARPIN – Lire et écrire à Babylone
Paris 2008 Éd. PUF pp. 17-41.

165 A. LEMAIRE – La diffusion de l'alphabet dans le bassin méditerranéen
in: Langues et écritures de la Méditerranée (Éd. Khartala, 2006) pp. 200-201.


The Assyrian scribes are rarely represented167 (first

time around 800 BCE)168, but always by two: one with a
tablet and stylus and the other with a parchment and quill
(see opposite figure). Despite the indirect evidence of the
existence of Assyrian archives on parchment none of these
documents has not yet been found. Achaemenid archives
have the same problem. According to Diodorus, Ctesias,
who lived in the time of Artaxerxes II, said to have drawn
his information from past events, and laws, which were
recorded by Persians on royal parchments (Historical
Library II:32) that confirms the Bible (Esther 6:1-2, 10:2).
Indeed, it seems that from the year 27 of Darius, after his
trip to Egypt, Achaemenid administration has adopted the
use of Egyptian papyrus for writing their documents (to the detriment of tablets) because
after the writing of a digest of Egyptian legal system (Book of Ordinances) in the year 19 of
Darius, then (year 27) an addendum was written in Aramaic on papyrus and in documentary
writing (on tablets?). Thus, the archives (non-perishable) from major temples cease at the
end of the reign of Darius and it's the same with most of the private archives of Babylon's
region169. In fact, if the archives of the great temples fall drastically from 495 BCE it is
perhaps due to a centralization ordered by the palaces of Susa and Persepolis. However, the
palace of Persepolis was burned and destroyed by Alexander the Great and the excavations
at Susa have delivered so far no archive to the Achaemenid period170. Both phenomena,
local government reorganization and increasing of Aramaic influence on Babylonian
population were likely overlapping. So although the Assyrian and Achaemenid Empire had
possessed annals on parchment in Aramaic, it remains nothing. Archaeologists concluded
(obviously) that these records on parchment never existed.
According to archeology the oldest traces of Phoenician script appear on the
sarcophagus of Ahiram in Byblos (dated 1000 BCE). But the story of Wenamun171, dated
year 5 of Smendes (1090-1064), contradicts this assertion. Wenamun explains that he was
sent to Palestine and after leaving Tyre he met Zakarbaal the prince of Byblos. In this city,
he negotiated with Werketer, the boat captain, who read out a journal roll of his forefathers in his
presence in order to prove the antiquity and legitimacy of his trade with Egypt (Story of
Wenamun II:9-11). The Egyptian story proves two points: 1) a mere boat captain could
read Phoenician in 1085 BCE (and also translate it into Egyptian) and 2) this writing
probably dating back at least to 1150 BCE (time of Captain's forefathers).
Letters (clay tablets) from El-Amarna Egyptian chancery cover a short period from
Amenhotep III (1383-1345) to Ay (1327-1323) but they show that Egypt, yet a great
power, used Babylonian (cuneiform writing) as diplomatic language. This language mixing a
lexicon Canaanite with a Babylonian syntax was used for international trade with all the
Near Eastern kingdoms. Scribes in Canaan spoke Old Canaanite, close to Old Hebrew172,
167 Egyptian scribes are usually represented in a seated position, equipped with sharpened rush pens, palettes and small water jars (ink).
168 J. B. PRITCHARD - The Ancient Near East in Pictures
Princeton 1969 Ed. Princeton University Press p. 74.
169 F. JOANNÈS - La Mésopotamie au 1er millénaire avant J.C.
2000 Paris Ed. Armand Colin pp. 16,17,144.

170 Among the 23,595 Babylonian texts listed in the form of tablets (J. EVERLING - Répartition chronologique et géographique des
sources babyloniennes in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires, 2000, pp. 42-45), only 84 are dated during the reign of Xerxes, or
0.4% of the total, in addition, these records come from 18 different sites (S. GRAZIANI - I testi Mesopotamici datati al regno di Serse
485-465 a. c. in: Annali 46 sup. 47 (Rome 1986) Ed. Herder pp. X-XIII).
171 W.K. SIMPSON – The Report of Wenamon
in: The Literature of Ancient Egypt (2005) Ed. The American University in Cairo Press pp. 116-124.
172 E. LIPINSKI - Semitic Languages Outline of a Comparative Grammar
in: Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 80. Leuven 2001 Ed. Peeters pp. 59-60.
but although it was their mother tongue173, none tablet written in paleo-Hebrew has been
found. This apparent paradox is explained by the fact that writing is associated with a type
of medium: cursive scripts (hieratic and paleo-Hebrew) to papyrus and cuneiform writings
(Babylonian and Hurrian) to clay tablets. Egyptian letters were written in two copies: an
original in hieratic on papyrus, sent to one of the three Egyptian commissioners living in
Canaan, with its copy in cuneiform for the Chancery of vassal kings174. The Egyptian copy
(for the commissioner) served as a reference to the translator in case of ambiguity in the
reading of the Babylonian tablet. As originals (sent into Canaan) were written on papyrus,
they disappeared, while copies on clay tablets have survived the centuries.
The Amarna letters are misleading because they give the illusion that diplomatic
couriers were common among great powers whereas we would have almost nothing over
the period 1500-1200 without this exceptional discovery. For example, Egypt, in addition
to its diplomatic relations had also many important business relationships, including with
the Mycenaean empire and the famous city of Troy, as confirmed by the list of the Aegean
monument Amenhotep III (1383-1345) at Kom el-Hetan175, however no trade contract has
yet been found. The trade between Egypt and Aegean islands was controlled by Phoenician
sailors (Odyssey XIV:228-295). These commercial contracts had to exist, at least in the
major port cities of Phoenicia as Ugarit, Byblos, Beirut, Sidon and Tyre, but have generally
not been archived except by a few landowners and for a short time. If one denies the
existence of these contracts one reaches to a huge paradox: the Phoenicians, main traders
at the time, would have been able to write all the languages, except their own! This is not
serious. The city of Ugarit, the only one we have found the Chancery, provides the answer
because some of these letters176 refer to wax tablets. Greek merchants in connection with
Phoenician sailors (Odyssey IV:617; VIII:158-164, XV:415-471) should use this type of
medium for writing because clay tablets are not convenient for carrying them on boats and
poorly adapted to cursive scripts as Greek and Phoenician. The only character whose
precise practice of writing (Mycenaean) in the works of Homer is Proteus, the first king of
Tiryns (Iliad VI:169), who used a "folded tablet": He [Proteus] gave baneful signs to her, drawing
on a folded tablet many mortal characters, he invited her to show it [the letter] to her stepfather, for his ruin.
This amazing remark (long considered fanciful) is in agreement with recent archaeological
discoveries177: the "folded tablet" should be a diptych made of wood covered with wax and
"many characters" should be syllabograms of Linear B (Mycenaean). As the clay tablets
discovered in Crete are not real pieces of archiving but are rather accounting documents,
the originals should instead be recorded on suitable media such as palm leaves, according
to Pliny (Natural History XIII:21), or more likely on diptychs in wood covered with wax178,
as shown by the Uluburun179 wreck dated around 1320 BCE. If Herodotus (The Histories
II:44) was able to consult the archives of Tyre (c. 450 BCE) and if the Phoenician priests
were able to indicate the date (c. 2750 BCE) of the founding of the oldest temple in their
173 A.F. RAINEY – Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets Vol. 2
Leiden 1996 Ed. Society of Biblical Literature pp. 2-3, 15, 31-32.
in: LIPO n°13 Paris 1987 Éd. Cerf pp. 19-21.

S. WACHSMANN – Keftiu, the “Isles in the Midst of the Sea” and Alashia
in: Aegeans in the Theban Tombs (Peeters, 1987) pp. 93-101.
175 J. STRANGE – Caphtor-Keftiu: a new investigation
176 S. LACKENBACHER – Textes akkadiens d'Ugarit
in: Littératures Anciennes du Proche-Orient 20 (Cerf , 2002), pp. 22 n.11, 202.

177 W. WAAL – They wrote on wood. The case for a hieroglyphic scribal tradition on wooden writing boards in Hittite Anatolia
in: Anatolian Studies 61 (2011) pp. 21-34.

178 J. DRIESSEN – Homère et les tablettes en linéaire B. Mise au point
in: L'Antiquité classique 61 (Bruxelles 1992), pp. 5-37.

179 C. PULAK – The Uluburun Shipwreck and Late Bronze Age Trade
in: Beyond Babylon: Art, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Second Millenium B.C. Metropolitan Museum, 2008.
city, confirmed by Archaeology, it implies that the Tyrians knew writing for a long time.
Pseudo-hieroglyphic script, also called Proto-Byblian or Proto-Byblic, is known from ten
inscriptions found in Byblos (and from some Canaanite scarabs of the Second Intermediate
Period180). These inscriptions, undeciphered but many signs resemble letters of the later
Phoenician alphabet181, are engraved on bronze plates and spatulas, and carved in stone.
They are dated by some scholars between 2300 to 1750 BCE182.
Mycenaean writing183 (Linear B), the ancestor of modern Greek disappears around
1190 BCE with the destruction of the "third palaces" and reappears around 750 BCE, in a
new form (Archaic Greek), with the emergence of Greek cities. The fluidity of cursive
writing on clay tablets by Mycenaean scribes during the period 1450-1190 BCE involves a
widespread use of ink on parchment. In addition, some seals have retained the imprint of
ligatures on folded parchments184, which were the usual medium at this time in Greece185.
Mycenaean sailors have therefore used wax tablets and parchments to write their contracts,
but it remains absolutely nothing. Similarly, Phoenician sailors had to use the same media
for the same reasons. Even if Ugaritic is ranked among North Semitic languages while
Phoenician and Old Canaanite languages are classified as West Semitic they have many
things in common186 including the use of an alphabetic script. No Phoenician contracts
have been found, but several clay tablets in Ugaritic cuneiform (c. 1350 BCE) was written
with an alphabetic writing instead of a syllabary (general case). This confirms that alphabet
signs, not syllabaries, was reserved for Semitic writings (Ugaritic and Phoenician), but as
this medium was perishable these contracts all disappeared very soon.
Concerning Hebrew script used by the Israelites the situation is more complicated
than the previous cases because since their arrival in Canaan (c. 1500 BCE) until the
establishment of their first king (c. 1100 BCE) there was no Jewish Chancery and therefore
no official documents. However, the priests had to teach the Israelites concerning the Law
of Moses (Leviticus 10:8-11), which means reading and writing even if this teaching activity
was ups and downs (2Chronicles 17:9). Some priests have been called Sopherim because they
were "literate" or "counters of letters" what shows the importance of writing for Israelites
(modern words as decipher and zero come from Arabic sifr or Hebrew sepher). The Hyksos
who arrived in Palestine around 1500 BCE already spoke Old Canaanite as evidenced by
their Semitic names and knew proto-Canaanite writing (which has been used in mines of
Serabit el-Khadim). Coming from Egypt they probably continued to use papyrus as writing
material rather than parchment, more expensive and therefore rarely used. The situation
was reversed in Greece, according to Herodotus (The Histories V:58), because of the
scarcity of papyrus in Ionia. We note also that Moses asks to be "wiped out/ rubed over"
(Exodus 32:32-33) not to be "scratched out", because to erase ink from a papyrus it was
enough to moisten it while a parchment had to be scratched out. Papyrus was (prior to the
6th century BCE) the preferred medium for biblical rolls as it could be (rarely) eaten
(Ezekiel 3:1-3) or sent to the bottom of a river by tying it with a stone (Jeremiah 51:63-64),
that would not have been necessary with a parchment flowing pic.
180 D. BEN-TOR - Pseudo Hieroglyphs on Canaanite Scarabs
in: Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections Vol 1:1(Israel Museum, 2009) pp. 1-7.
181 In addition, the name of all kings of Byblos (= Gebal "mountain") transcribed into hieroglyphs are of West Semitic origin.
182 J. GOODY -The Interface Between the Written and the Oral
Cambridge 1993 Ed. Cambridge University Press (1987), pp. 44-49.

183 R. TREUIL, P. DARCQUE , J.-C. POURSAT, G. TOUCHAIS -Les Civilisations égéennes du Néolithique et de l'Âge du Bronze
Paris 2008 Éd. Presses universitaires de France pp. 32, 138, 352-353, 454-457, 500-505.
184 Y. DUHOUX, A. MORPURGO DAVIES – A Companion to Linear B. Mycenean Greek Texts and their World Vol. 2
Louvain-la-Neuve 2001, Ed. Peeters pp. 124-125.

185 M.A. DESBOEUFS – Papyrus et parchemin dans l'antiquité gréco-romaine
Grenoble 2006-2007 Master2 Histoire et histoire de l'art (Université Grenoble II) pp. 52-54.
in: Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 80. Leuven 2001 Ed. Peeters pp. 51-60.
Despite unfavorable conditions, absence of Chancery and use of a perishable

medium, it is possible to find traces of the script used by the Israelites through a few
ostraca written with ink. However there is a major difficulty, these ostraca are not datable
neither by carbon-14, due to an absence of carbon, nor by epigraphy, due to a lack of
documents, but by stratigraphy that only gives an imprecise interval of dates (for example
ostracon of Izbet Sartah in paleo-Hebrew is dated between 1200 BCE and 1000 BCE).
The inscriptions in paleo-Hebrew could actually appear as soon 1450 BCE. Indeed,
epigraphists consider that paleo-Hebrew having evolved from proto-Canaanite it has truly
been standardized only around 1000 BCE and prior to that date it was proto-Canaanite.
This conception of an evolution of the writing is flawed for the following reason: the
standardization of inscriptions arises from the existence of scribal schools187 (who were
professionals dependent on a administration) because the slovenly inscriptions from
individuals are not standardized and the letters are drawn by their acronym (A aleph "beef"
(Psalm 144:14) becomes head of an ox, R resh "head" (Deuteronomy 11:12) becomes a
human head, etc.). Thus the paleo-Hebrew would be just a standardized proto-Canaanite.
This conclusion is confirmed by the inscriptions discovered at Lachish. On a bowl we read
the following sentence: b"l"t / ym / yr" "in the 3rd day of the month [of ?]" and a ewer of the
same time, we read: mtn: "y [rb]ty ’lt "Mattan: offering [to?] my sover[eign] Elat". The word
El being above what looks like a candlestick with 7 branches (Exodus 25:31-32?).
Bowl: b"l"t / ym / yr" Ewer: mtn: "y [rb]ty ’lt (1400-1300 BCE)
The writing appearing on the bowl (except the R that could be proto-Canaanite), on
the ewer and those in paleo-Hebrew dated 1550-1480188 are identical. The epigraphic
ranking of these inscriptions as proto-Canaanite is artificial and Puech himself recognizes
that ceramics and archeology recommend rather a date in the 14th century189. This dating
1400-1300 BCE is rejected by epigraphists since it would imply an early coexistence of
paleo-Hebrew with proto-Canaanite, although this is the most logical explanation. The
writer of these inscriptions should be a Palestinian professional and not an individual,
because the writing on the bowl refers to a schedule, which requires an administrative
contract, and that on the ewer was for a temple. In both cases, the writing by a professional
187 C.A. ROLLSTON –Scribal Education in Ancient Israel: The Old Hebrew Epigraphic Evidence
in: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 344 (2006) pp. 47-74.
188 S. DALLEY – Babylonian Tablets from the First Sealand Dynasty in the Schøyen Collection
in: Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology Vol. 9 (CDL Press, 2009) pp. 1-16, 112, plates LIII, CLIIV.
189 E. PUECH –Origine de l'alphabet
in: Revue Biblique 93:2, 1986, pp. 177-178.

had to be standardized and was thus paleo-Hebrew. The language used in Lachish (that
name could mean "obstinate") was Old Canaanite, close to Old Hebrew. This important
Canaanite city was fortified because it was on the road giving access to Egypt. Although
Joshua destroyed it (Joshua 10:32) during his conquest of Palestine (in 1493 BCE), Lachish
has again become Canaanite near 1400 BCE since a Canaanite temple was built at that
time190, replaced by a second temple in 1325 BCE and then by a temple III. The Amarna
letters show that during the period 1370-1350 this city, headed by Canaanite mayors was
partly Jewish [Paapu an Egyptian commissioner wrote to pharaoh in order to warn him
against the disloyalty of !ip&i Ba‘la and Zimredda, mayors of Lachish (EA 333), ‘Abdi-
A"tarti, the mayor of Qiltu warned Pharaoh that Lachish was hostile to him (EA 335),
‘Abdi-!eba, the mayor of Jerusalem, informed Pharaoh that the city of Lachish helped
Apiru (Hebrews) and that some servants who joined them had hit Zimredda its mayor (EA
287, 288)]. The Temple III was destroyed by Philistines around 1200 BCE (Judges 10:7-8),
then the city, completely destroyed by fire around 1150 BCE191, again by Philistines (Judges
13:1), is abandoned for long period. It was rebuilt by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:5-12) in
975 BCE. During the period 1500-1200 the inhabitants of Lachish have Hebrew sounding
names like: Yaphia "radiant" (Joshua 10:3); Yabni-Ilu "God created" (EA 328); !ip&i Ba‘la
"judgment of Baal", Zimredda "melody (?) of Hadda" (EA 333). This is as true as the
inhabitants of Jerusalem: Adoni-'édeq "Lord of justice" (Joshua 10:3), ‘Abdi-!eba "servant
of !eba" (EA 287). The inhabitants of Lachish, Jewish (Hebrew) or Canaanite, used the
same language (Old Canaanite), but for official documents Akkadian remained the norm192.
Without precise dating (to +/- 1 year) and without historical text,
most inscriptions discovered by archaeologists generally provide little
information. The Beth-Shemesh ostracon193 (opposite figure), for
example, comes from the Stratum IV dated 1400-1200 BCE194 by pottery,
contains this inscription: Jars of wine 7 (bt yn ......) to Azaah 1 (l‘z’" .), Ahaz
1 (’"‘z .), Shimeon 4 (!m‘n ....), Hanun 1 ($nn .). Puech dates it 1300-1200
BCE relying on epigraphic criteria and ranks it as proto-Canaanite.
However this conclusion is questionable because of the very low number
of ancient inscriptions, thus epigraphic criteria are uncertain, which creates variables dating
(up to 4 centuries!) among epigraphists. Moreover, according to the Bible (Joshua 21:16;
1Samuel 6:15; 1Kings 4:9), this city remained in Israelite territory since the conquest of
Joshua (c. 1490 BCE) until it was taken by the Philistines (c. 740 BCE) during the reign of
Ahaz195 (2Chronicles 28:16-18), which would rank the inscription as paleo-Hebrew rather
than proto-Canaanite. As the name Shimeon is typically Hebrew (Genesis 29:33) the
Canaanite origin of the inscription seems unlikely.
If ostraca in paleo-Hebrew are few, those quoting biblical passages are necessarily
rarer because there is always a gap of several centuries between the moment a book is
written and its dissemination to the public. Homer's books196, for example, were written
around 850-800 BCE according to Herodotus (The Histories II:53) and the Chronicle of
Paris 1986 Éd. Gabalda pp. 80, 192.
191 D. USSISHKIN - Key to the Israelite Conquest of Canaan?
in: Biblical Archaeology Review 13:1 (1987) pp. 35-39.

192 W. HOROWITZ, T. OSHIMA, S. SANDERS – Cuneiform in Canaan. Cuneiform Sources from the Land of Israel in Ancient Times
Jerusalem 2006 Ed. Israel Exploration Society. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem pp. 4-19.
193 E. PUECH – Origine de l'alphabet
in: Revue Biblique 93:2 (1986) pp. 172-177.

194 A. MAZAR – Archeology of the Land of the Bible
New York 1990 Ed. Doubleday p. 242.

195 This town recaptured by Tiglath-Phileser III in 732 BCE will be finally destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in 587 BCe.
196 V. BÉRARD, P. DEMONT, M.P. NOËL - L'Odyssée
1996 Librairie Générale Française , Le Livre de Poche p. 12.

Paros marble, but the earliest fragments of papyrus (found in Egypt) of Homer's works are
dating more than 500 years later (285-250 BCE) and the oldest complete manuscript is the
Laurentianus dated around 1000 CE.
The excavations at Tell Qeiyafa (the camp enclosure
of 1Samuel 17:20?) have identified the city Shaaraim197 which
was inhabited until the reign of David (1Chronicles 4:31;
1Samuel 17:52). The end of this city has been dated 1010
+/- 40 BCE by Carbone 14 through olive pits found in the
site. Not only this town dates back from the time of David
but these excavations have also unearthed a Hebrew
inscription (opposite figure), which reads:
[... your neigbour?]
1) do not exploit and serve G[od]. Despised by
2) the judge, and the widow cried, he had power
3) over the foreign resident and the child he suppressed together.
4) Men and leaders have made a king.
5) Devoting <sixty> servants among the generations.
As noted Puech198, this text describes a situation identical to that of the biblical text
when the elders of Israel asked Samuel to enthrone a king (Saul) in order to replace his
sons who became corrupt judges (1Samuel 8:1-5). The first (readable) line implicitly refers
to a well known passage of the Law of Moses: do not exploit your neighbour (Leviticus 19:13).
With the establishment of kingship in Israel the number of documents in paleo-
Hebrew increases as well as texts referring to the Bible. However, documents relating to
the early Judean kings (David and Solomon) are few because their reigns took place during
a period of decline of the two great empires of Egypt and Mesopotamia. Among the 113
kings in the Levant listed during the period 1000-600 BCE, including those of the Bible,
only 16 are mentioned in inscriptions199. Despite the extent of their empire we know only
very little action of most Egyptian and Babylonian kings during this period (except the
name and the duration of their reign). According to the biblical text, the only outstanding
action with the Israelites involved the Egyptian kingdom. Absence of archaeological
remains of the famous temple of Solomon is explained by the fact that this temple was
destroyed by the Babylonians in the fall of Jerusalem. In addition, when King Herod the
Great restored the second temple, built on the remains of the previous one, he began by its
foundations that had eliminated last Solomonic vestiges200 because, according to Josephus,
Herod carried out a complete reconstruction of the temple (Jewish Antiquities XV:354,
380, 421). The two significant events during the 10th century BCE are: 1) the attack on
Jerusalem by Shoshenq I in the 5th year of Rehoboam (1Kings 14:25,26), in 972 BCE, and
2) the taking of Gezer, burned by Pharaoh Siamon in the year 24 of Solomon201, in 993
BCE. This Pharaoh is not named in the Bible but as noted Kitchen the only Egyptian
attested campaign in Palestine at that time is Siamon. In addition, the XXIth Dynasty is
distinguished by the fact that some of its pharaohs gave their daughter in marriage to
foreigners, which was the case of Solomon (1Kings 3:1, 9:16). The accuracy of
197 Y. GARFINKEL, S. GANOR -Khirbet Qeiyafa: Sha’arim in: The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 8 (2008) article 22.
Y. LEVIN –The Identification of Qeiyafa: A New Suggestion in: BASOR N°367 (August 2012) pp. 73-86.
198 E. PUECH –L'Ostracon de Khirbet Qeyafa et les débuts de la royauté en Israël
in: Revue Biblique 117 (2010) pp. 162-184.

199 A. MILLARD – King Solomon in his Ancient Context
in: The Age of Solomon (Brill 1997) Ed by L.K. Handy p. 46.

200 E.-M. L APERROUSAZ – Les temples de Jérusalem
Paris 2007 Éd. Non Lieu pp. 51-74, 104-120.

201 Construction began in year 4 (1 Kings 6:1) and ended 20 years later (1 Kings 9:10,16,17) or year 24.
chronological data from the Bible thus indirectly guarantees its authenticity. Paralleling of
Egyptian, Jewish, Assyrian and Babylonian chronologies over the period 1070-970 BCE:
Egypt Reign Israel Assyria Reign Babylonia Reign
Psusennes I 1064 - David A""ur-bêl-kala 1074-1056 Adad-apla-iddina 1070-1048
1057 - Erîba-Adad II 1056-1054 Marduk-ahhê-erîba 1048-1047
!am"î-Adad IV 1054-1050 Marduk-zêr-[…] 1047-1035
A""urna %irpal I 1050-1031 Nabû-"um-libur 1035-1027
-1018 -1017 Salmanazar II 1031-1019 Simbar-"ipak 1027 -
Amenemope 1018 - Solomon A""ur-nêrârî IV 1019-1013 -1009
-1009 1017 - A""ur-rabi II 1013 - Ea-mukîn-zêri 1009-1008
Osorkon the Elder 1009-1003 Ka""u-nâdin-ahi 1008-1006
Siamun 1003 - 984 Eulma"-"akin-"umi 1006 -989
Psusennes II 994 - Ninurta-kudurri-u %ur I 989-986
!iriki-"uqamuna 986-985
-980 -977 Mâr-bîti-apla-u%ur 985-980
Shoshenq I 980-959 Roboam -972 Nabû-mukîn-apli 980-944
If the great empires as Egypt, Assyria and Babylonia had no conflict with Israel
during the reigns of David and Solomon (and therefore no document) this was not the case
of many kingdoms around: Phoenicia and Syria in the north, Amon, Moab and Edom in
the east, Philistia in the south, to mention only the most important. As these kingdoms
have all disappeared after the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II (605-562), their records do not
exist for a long time, however two kings (those of Syria and Moab) erected steles attesting
that a Judaean kingdom was widely known at the 9th century BCE as House-of-David. The
first stele is that of Mesha, king of Moab, who gives his "victorious" version of the events
recounted in 2Kings 3:4-27: As regards Mesha the king of Moab, he became a sheep raiser, and he
paid to the king of Israel a 100,000 lambs and a 100,000 unshorn male sheep. And it came about that
as soon as Ahab died, the king of Moab began to revolt against the king of Israel. Consequently King
Jehoram went out on that day from Samaria and mustered all Israel (...) When the king of Moab saw that
the battle had proved too strong for him, he at once took with him 700 men drawing sword to break
through to the king of Edom; but they were not able to. Finally he took his firstborn son who was going to
reign in place of him and offered him up as a burnt sacrifice upon the wall. And there came to be great
indignation against Israel, so that they pulled away from against him and returned to their land. We also
note (below) on the stele of Mesha the presence of "King of Israel" in line 5, "Yehowah" in
line 18 and "the sheep of the land. And dwelt in Horonen the House-[of-D]avid" at the
end of line 31202. This reading is disputed but as noted Lemaire the only letter that makes
sense in the sentence line 31 is a D203. The name is spelled BT [D]WD without separation
point (BYTDWD in Dan stele) implying a familiar expression at that time.
202 E. LIPINSKI – On the Skirts of Canaan in the Iron Age

in: Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 153 pp. 336-337.
203 A. LEMAIRE - House of David" Restored in Moabite Inscription. A new restoration of a famous inscription reveals another mention
of the "House of David" in the ninth century B.C.E. in: Biblical Archaeology Review 20:03 (Mai/Juin 1994) pp. 30-37.
The other stele204 is that of Hazael, king of Syria, in which he assigns to him the
simultaneous execution of two kings, Jehoram king of Israel and Ahazyahu king of the
House of David, killed in fact by Jehu according to the biblical text: he went with Jehoram the
son of Ahab to the war against Hazael the king of Syria at Ramoth-gilead, but the Syrians struck down
Jehoram. So Jehoram the king returned to get healed at Jezreel from the wounds that the Syrians got to
inflict upon him at Ramah when he fought Hazael the king of Syria. As for Ahazyahu the son of Jehoram
the king of Judah, he went down to see Jehoram the son of Ahab in Jezreel, for he was sick (...) Jehoram
the king of Israel and Ahazyahu the king of Judah went out, each in his own war chariot. As they
continued on out to meet Jehu, they got to find him in the tract of land of Naboth the Jezreelite (...) And
Jehu himself filled his hand with a bow and proceeded to shoot Jehoram between the arms, so that the arrow
came out at his heart, and he collapsed in his war chariot (2Kings 8:28-9:29). In addition to biblical
names Jehoram and Ahazyahu, we note the presence of the words "King of Israel" and
"House of David" in lines 8 and 9 of this stele (below).
1. [.....................].......[...................................] and cut [.......................]

2. [.........] my father went up [....................f]ighting at/against Ab[....]
3. And my father lay down; he went to his [fathers]. And the king of I[s-]
4. -rael penetrated into my father's land[. And] Hadad made me-myself-king
5. And Hadad went in front of me[, and] I departed from .........[.................]
6. of my kings. And I killed two [power]ful kin[gs], who harnessed two thou[sand cha-]
7. -riots and two thousand horsemen. [I killed Jeho]ram son of [Ahab]
8. king of Israel, and I killed [Ahaz]yahu son of [Jehoram kin]g
9. of the House of David. And I set [..............................................]
10. their land ...[.....................................................................................]
11. other ...[................................................................... and Jehu ru-]
12. -led over Is[rael ...............................................................................]
13. siege upon [......................................................................................]
The House of David was therefore well known in the 9th century BCE. The name
David appears also among toponyms of the south of Palestine, on the list of Shoshenq I, as
["3]-y-d-b-[i]3 d-y-w3-ti "[the heights?] of David"205. Archaeologists who deny the existence
of the kingdom of David and the use of annals at that time (c. 1000 BCE) are in bad faith.
204 A. LEMAIRE – Épigraphie palestinienne : Nouveau Documents. I. Fragment de stèle araméenne de Tell Dan (IXe s. av. J.-C.)
in: Henoch 16 (1994) pp. 87-93.
Cambridge 2003 Ed. W.B. Eerdmans pp. 93, 615.

The establishment of kingship in Israel, and especially Judean Chancery, increased

significantly the number of documents written in paleo-Hebrew as well as texts referring
explicitly to the Bible as evidenced the two silver scrolls206 (below) found in Jerusalem and
dated 650-600 BCE:
1. [may he] be blessed 1. Yehow[ah ..]

2. [-] by Yehowah 2. ...
3. the helper and 3. grea[t .. who keeps]
4. the rebuker of 4. the covenant and
5. Evil. May bless you 5. Graciousness toward those who love
6. Yehowah, may 6. [hi]m and those who keep [his]
7. he keep you 7. [commandments] ...
8. May he make shine 8. [?]
9. Yehowah his face 9. blessing more than any
10. upon you and 10. [sna]re and more than Evil.
11. grant you 11. For redemption is in him.
12. peace 12. For Yehowah
13. 13. is our restorer [and]
14. 14. rock. May bless
15. 15. you Yehowah and
16. 16. [may he] keep you. [May] he
17. 17. make shine Yehowah
18. 18. [his] face [upon you ..]
Both silver amulets contain the famous priestly blessing (highlighted in blue) recited
in the temple for Yom Kippur. The exact quotation of a biblical text (Numbers 6:24-26) in
an amulet shows that the Bible was known and read since several centuries. As the Bible
was read only in the temple and in Hebrew, it is unreasonable to expect finding any
evidence outside of Israel. Archaeologists are even more inexcusable on the role of Moses
in the writing of the Pentateuch and the standardization of paleo-Hebrew script (c. -1500),
that all this process was already well known to Greek and Latin historians207. Thus, when
Moses arrived in Canaan (c. -1500) Cadmos of Tyre left to Greece. After the Trojan War
(c. -1180) Phoenician sons of Cadmus passed on their writing to the Mycenaeans.
206 G. BARKAY, A.G. VAUGHIN, M.J. LUNDBERG, B. ZUKERMAN – The Amulets from Ketef Hinnom: A New Edition and Evaluation
in: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 334 (2004) pp. 41-71.
207 M. STERN - Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism
Jerusalem 1976 Ed. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities pp. 26-34.
! Homer (c. 850 BCE), first Greek epic poet: Blest and thrice blest were those sons of Danaus
who fell before Troy in the cause of the sons of Atreus (Odyssey V:306) The Achaeans sent Tydeus
as their envoy, and he found the sons of Cadmus gathered in great numbers (Iliad IV:388).
! Hesiod (c. 700 BCE), a Greek poet: Grim war and dread battle destroyed a part of them, some
in the land of Cadmus at seven-gated Thebe when they fought for the flocks of Oedipus, and some, when
it had brought them in ships over the great sea gulf to Troy for rich-haired Helen's sake: there death's
end enshrouded a part of them (Works and Days §4).
! Herodotus (c. 450 BCE), a Greek historian: I believe that Melampus learned the worship of
Dionysus chiefly from Cadmus of Tyre and those who came with Cadmus from Phoenicia to the land
now called Boeotia (...) When I asked why Perseus appeared only to them, and why, unlike all other
Egyptians, they celebrate games, they told me that Perseus was by lineage of their city; for Danaus and
Lynceus, who travelled to Greece, were of Khemmis; and they traced descent from these down to Perseus
(...) Now the Dionysus who was called the son of Semele, daughter of Cadmus, was about 1600 years
before my time (...) because the temple of Athena in Lindus is said to have been founded by the
daughters of Danaus, when they landed there in their flight from the sons of Egyptus (...) These
Phoenicians who came with Cadmus and of whom the Gephyraeans were a part brought with them to
Hellas, among many other kinds of learning, the alphabet, which had been unknown before this, I
think, to the Greeks. As time went on the sound and the form of the letters were changed. At this time
the Greeks who were settled around them were for the most part Ionians, and after being taught the
letters by the Phoenicians, they used them with a few changes of form. In so doing, they gave to these
characters the name of Phoenician, as was quite fair seeing that the Phoenicians had brought them into
Greece. The Ionians have also from ancient times called sheets of papyrus skins, since they formerly used
the skins of sheep and goats due to the lack of papyrus. Even to this day there are many foreigners who
write on such skins. I have myself seen Cadmean writing in the temple of Ismenian Apollo at Thebes of
Boeotia engraved on certain tripods and for the most part looking like Ionians letters. On one of the
tripods there is this inscription: Amphitryon dedicated me from the spoils of Teleboae. This would date
from about the time of Laius the son of Labdacus, grandson of Polydorus and great-grandson of
Cadmus (The Histories II:49,91,145,182; V:58-59).
! Hecataeus of Abdera (315-305 BCE), a Greek historian and sceptic philosopher: When
in ancient times a pestilence arose in Egypt, the common people ascribed their troubles to the workings of
a divine agency; for indeed with many strangers of all sorts dwelling in their midst and practising
different rites of religion and sacrifice, their own traditional observances in honour of the gods had fallen
into disuse. Hence the natives of the land surmised that unless they removed the foreigners, their troubles
would never be resolved. At once, therefore, the aliens were driven from the country, and the most
outstanding and active among them banded together and, as some say, were cast ashore in Greece and
certain other regions; their leaders were notable men, chief among them being Danaus and Cadmus. But
the greater number were driven into what is now called Judaea, which is not far distant from Egypt and
was at that time utterly uninhabited. The colony was headed by a man called Moses, outstanding both
for his wisdom and for his courage. On taking possession of the land he founded, besides other cities, one
that is now the most renowned of all, called Jerusalem (...) And at the end of their laws there is even
appended the statement: "These are the words that Moses heard from God and declares unto the Jews."
! Marble of Paros208 (written in 264 BCE): From when Cadmus the son of Agenor came to
Thebes [... and] built the Cadmeia, 1255 years (1519 BCE). From when [the first fifty-oared] ship
[prepared by Danaus] sailed from Egypt to Greece (...) 1247 years (1511 BCE).
! Greek inscription209 dated 234 BCE: The inhabitants of these [Balearic] islands were the
Canaanites fleeing from the face of Joshua the son of Nun (Paschal Chronicle dated 630 CE).
208 F. JACOBY - Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker
Leiden 1962 Ed. E.J. Brill pp. 993,994.
209 A.J. FRENDO - Two Long-Lost Phoenician Inscriptions and the Emergence of Ancient Israel
in: Palestine Exploration Quarterly 134,1 (2002) pp. 37-43.

! Demetrius the Chronograph (c. 220 BCE), a Hellenistic chronograph and Jewish
historian: Since Adam [in 5307 BCE] until the birth of Abraham 3334 years (1973 BCE), until
the entry of Jacob into Egypt 3624 years (1683 BCE), until the Exodus of Moses 3839 years (1468
BCE) (Stomata I:21, 141; Preparatio evangelica IX:21:1-19).
! Artapanus of Alexandria (c. 200 BCE), a Hellenistic Jewish historian: Moses was the
master of Orpheus. As an adult, he transmitted to people much useful knowledge (...) he confided the
sacred letters to the priests, and there were also cats, dogs, ibis (...) This is why Moses was loved by
crowds, and the priests, who considered him worthy of divine honors, called him Hermes, since he
interpreted the sacred letters (Preparatio evangelical IX:27).
210
! Eupolemus (c. 160 BCE), a Hellenistic Jewish historian: Moses was the first to acquire
wisdom and transmit writing to the Jews, the Phoenicians received it, then from the Phoenicians to the
Greeks. Moses was the first to write laws for the Jews (Preparatio evangelica IX:26).
! Diodorus of Sicily (c. 50 BCE), a Greek historian: Cadmus, who was a citizen of Egyptian
Thebes, begat several children, of whom one was Semelê (...) And since he had become conversant with
the teachings of the Egyptians about the gods, he transferred the birth of the ancient Osiris to more
recent times, and, out of regard for the descendants of Cadmus, instituted a new initiation (...) In
general, they say, the Greeks appropriate to themselves the most renowned of both Egyptian heroes and
gods, and so also the colonies sent out by them (...) Now the Egyptians say that also after these events a
great number of colonies were spread from Egypt over all the inhabited world. To Babylon, for instance,
colonists were led by Belus [Baal], who was held to be the son of Poseidon and Libya; and after
establishing himself on the Euphrates (...) They say also that those who set forth with Danaus, likewise
from Egypt, settled what is practically the oldest city in Greece, Argos, and that the nation of the Colchi
in Pontus and that of the Jews, which lies between Arabia and Syria, were founded as colonies by
certain emigrants from their country (...) among the Jews Moses referred his laws to the god who is
invoked as Iao (Historical Library I:23, 28, 94). Many generations later men supposed that
Cadmus, the son of Agenor, had been the first to bring the letters from Phoenicia to Greece; and after
the time of Cadmus onwards the Greeks were believed to have kept making new discoveries in the science
of writing, since a sort of general ignorance of the facts possessed the Greeks (...) About this time
Danaüs together with his daughters fled from Egypt (...) And a little after this time Cadmus, the son of
Agenor, having been dispatched by the king to seek out Europe, put ashore at Rhodes (...) Now
Cadmus honoured likewise the Lindian Athena with votive offerings, one of which was a striking
bronze cauldron worked after the ancient manner, and this carried an inscription in Phoenician letters,
which, men say, were first brought from Phoenicia to Greece (...) To the Muses, we are further told, it
was given by their father Zeus to discover the letters and to combine words in the way which is designated
poetry. And in reply to those who say that the Syrians are the discoverers of the letters, the Phoenicians
having learned them from the Syrians and then passed them on to the Greeks, and that these
Phoenicians are those who sailed to Europe together with Cadmus and this is the reason why the
Greeks call the letters "Phoenician," men tell us, on the other hand, that the Phoenicians were not the
first to make this discovery, but that they did no more than to change the forms of the letters, whereupon
the majority of mankind made use of the way of writing them as the Phoenicians devised it, and so the
letters received the designation we have mentioned above (Historical Library V:57-58,74) The
ancestors of the Jews had been driven out of all Egypt as men who were impious and detested by the
gods. For by way of purging the country all persons who had white or leprous marks on their bodies had
been assembled and driven across the border, as being under a curse; the refugees had occupied the
territory round about Jerusalem, and having organized the nation of the Jews had made their hatred of
mankind into a tradition, and on this account had introduced utterly outlandish laws: not to break
bread with any other race, nor to show them any good will at all (...) Antiochus, called Epiphanes, on
defeating the Jews had entered the innermost sanctuary of the god's temple, where it was lawful for the
priest alone to enter. Finding there a marble statue of a heavily bearded man seated on an ass, with a
B.Z. WACHOLDER - Eupolemus. A Study of Judeo-Greek Literature
210
Cincinnati 1974 Ed. Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion pp. 71-96.
book in his hands, he supposed it to be an image of Moses, the founder of Jerusalem and organizer of
the nation, the man, moreover, who had ordained for the Jews their misanthropic and lawless customs
(Historical Library XXXIV:1).
! Strabo (c. 20 CE), a Greek geographer, philosopher and historian: An Egyptian priest
named Moses, who possessed [managed] a portion of the country called the Lower [Egypt], being
dissatisfied with the established institutions there, left it and came to Judea with a large body of people
who worshipped the Divinity (...) By such doctrine Moses persuaded a large body of right-minded
persons to accompany him to the place where Jerusalem now stands. He easily obtained possession of it,
as the spot was not such as to excite jealousy, nor for which there could be any fierce contention; for it is
rocky, and, although well supplied with water, it is surrounded by a barren and waterless territory. The
space within [the city] is 60 stadia [in circumference], with rock underneath the surface. Instead of
arms, he taught that their defence was in their sacred things and the Divinity, for whom he was desirous
of finding a settled place, promising to the people to deliver such a kind of worship and religion as should
not burthen those who adopted it with great expense, nor molest them with [so-called] divine possessions,
nor other absurd practices. Moses thus obtained their good opinion, and established no ordinary kind of
government. All the nations around willingly united themselves to him, allured by his discourses and
promises (Geography XVI:2:35-36).
! Pline the Elder (c. 70 CE), a Roman naturalist: I have always been of opinion, that letters were
of Assyrian origin, but other writers, Gellius, for instance, suppose that they were invented in Egypt by
Mercury: others, again, will have it that they were discovered by the Syrians; and that Cadmus brought
from Phœnicia 16 letters into Greece. To these, Palamedes, it is said, at the time of the Trojan war,
added these 4: H Y ! X. Simonides, the lyric poet, afterwards added a like number " # $ %; the
sounds denoted by all of which are now received into our alphabet (Natural History VII:57).
! Tacitus (c. 100 CE), a senator and a historian of the Roman Empire: The Egyptians, in
their animal-pictures, were the first people to represent thought by symbols: these, the earliest documents
of human history, are visible to!day, impressed upon stone. They describe themselves also as the inventors
of the alphabet: from Egypt, they consider, the Phoenicians, who were predominant at sea, imported the
knowledge into Greece, and gained the credit of discovering what they had borrowed. For the tradition
runs that it was Cadmus, arriving with a Phoenician fleet, who taught the art to the still uncivilized
Greek peoples. Others relate that Cecrops of Athens (or Linus of Thebes) and, in the Trojan era,
Palamedes of Argos, invented 16 letters, the rest being added later by different authors, particularly
Simonides. In Italy the Etruscans learned the lesson from the Corinthian Demaratus, the Aborigines
from Evander the Arcadian; and in form the Latin characters are identical with those of the earliest
Greeks. But, in our case too, the original number was small, and additions were made subsequently: a
precedent for Claudius, who appended three more letters, which had their vogue during his reign, then fell
into desuetude, but still meet the eye on the official bronzes fixed in the forums and temples (Annals
XI:14). Some say that the Jews were fugitives from the island of Crete, who settled on the nearest coast
of Africa about the time when Saturn was driven from his throne by the power of Jupiter. Evidence of
this is sought in the name (...) Others assert that in the reign of Isis the overflowing population of Egypt,
led by Hierosolymus and Judas, discharged itself into the neighbouring countries. Many, again, say that
they were a race of Ethiopian origin, who in the time of king Cepheus were driven by fear and hatred of
their neighbours to seek a new dwelling-place. Others describe them as an Assyrian horde who, not
having sufficient territory, took possession of part of Egypt, and founded cities of their own in what is
called the Hebrew country, lying on the borders of Syria. Others, again, assign a very distinguished
origin to the Jews, alleging that they were the Solymi, a nation celebrated in the poems of Homer, who
called the city which they founded Hierosolyma after their own name. Most writers, however, agree in
stating that once a disease, which horribly disfigured the body, broke out over Egypt; that king
Bocchoris, seeking a remedy, consulted the oracle of Hammon, and was bidden to cleanse his realm, and
to convey into some foreign land this race detested by the gods. The people, who had been collected after
diligent search, finding themselves left in a desert, sat for the most part in a stupor of grief, till one of the
exiles, Moses by name, warned them not to look for any relief from God or man, forsaken as they were
of both, but to trust to themselves, taking for their heaven-sent leader that man who should first help
them to be quit of their present misery. They agreed, and in utter ignorance began to advance at random.
Nothing, however, distressed them so much as the scarcity of water, and they had sunk ready to perish in
all directions over the plain, when a herd of donkeys was seen to retire from their pasture to a rock
shaded by trees. Moses followed them, and, guided by the appearance of a grassy spot, discovered an
abundant spring of water (History V:2-5).
! Eusebius (c. 300 CE), a Roman historian, exegete and Christian polemicist: Orpheus, son
of Oeagrus, first brought over with him the mysteries of the Egyptians, and imparted them to the
Greeks; just, in fact, as Cadmus brought to them the Phoenician mysteries together with the knowledge
of letters: for the Greeks up to that time did not yet know the use of the alphabet (...) From Misor was
born Taautus, who invented the first written alphabet; the Egyptians called him Thouth, the
Alexandrians Thoth, and the Greeks Hermes (...) Tardily and painfully they learned the nature of
letters. Those at least who assign the greatest antiquity to their use of them boast of having learned it
from the Phoenicians and Cadmus. Nevertheless no one could show any record that is preserved even
from that time either in temples or on public monuments: seeing that there has been great doubt and
inquiry, whether even those who so many years later went on the expedition to Troy, made use of writing;
and the true opinion is rather that they were ignorant of the use now made of written letters (The
Preparation of the Gospel I:6:4, I:10:14, X:7:5-8). In the year 508 of Abraham [born in 2016
BCE]: Egypt left (1508 BCE) under Moses leading (...) in the year 543 (1473 CE): Danaus calls
Argos after being expelled from Egypt (...) In the year 563 of Abraham (1453 BCE) Cadmus, who
left Egyptian Thebes for Syria, reigns in Tyre and Sidon (Chronicle of Eusebius/Jerome)
! Moses of Khoren (370-486 CE), a prominent Armenian historian quoted by the
historian Procopius of Caesarea (500-562) in one of his book (History of the Wars
IV:10:21-22), wrote that a Phoenician inscription appearing on two columns built (c.
700 BCE ?) in the city of Tigisis in Numidia, beared the following sentence: we are they
who fled from the face of Joshua, the robber, the son of Nun.
Early historians considered Cadmus as the inventor of the Phoenician alphabet211
(after the arrival of the Hyksos in Palestine) and Palamedes212 (after the Trojan War) as the
inventor of new Greek letters (vowels?). The name of Cadmus means nothing in Greek,
but "East/ Orient" in Hebrew213. The Semitic term Qedem is old, it already appears in a
stele of Pharaoh Mentuhotep II (2045-1994) and refers to a region that was confused with
Phoenicia, according to the story of Sinuhe (§§ 52-54), which is in agreement with the
extended stay of Cadmus in Tyre. In addition, Greek mythology214 described Cadmus as a
descendant of Epaphos (son of Zeus) and Memphis (daughter of Nilos, the Nile).
However, the life of Epaphos resembles that of Moses (under the name Apopi) since he
was born near the Nile and was hidden from her mother some time in Syria and then was
brought to Egypt where he became king215. Agenor, father of Cadmus, had a twin Belos
(Baal) who ruled Egypt. He went to Syria and Belos had two son: Aegyptus and Danaus.
Greek tradition associates Cadmus and Moses, without confusing them, even though they
have many connecting points as the invention of the Phoenician alphabet (from Egyptian
hieroglyphs): Cadmus for Herodotus and Diodorus but Moses for Artapanus and
Eupolemus. According to the Paros marble, Cadmus would have arrived in Thebes in 1519
211 P. BORDREUIL – De Qadmos vers (l')Europe (À propos des cheminements de l'alphabet vers l'Occident)
in: Bulletin de la SELEFA n°9 (2007) pp. 13-20.
212 Le nom de Palamède est peut-être d'origine grecque et signifierait "Paume".
213 Les habitants du Sinaï sont appelés "fils de l'Est/ Orientaux" (Job 1:3; Genèse 29:1) ou "Qadmonites" (Genèse 15:19).
214 P. GRIMAL - Dictionnaire de la mythologie grecque et romaine
Paris 1999 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 71-73,141.

215 J. BÉRARD – Les Hyksos et la légende d'Io
in: Comptes-rendus des scéances de l'Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres n°95:4 (1951) pp. 445-447.
J. BÉRARD – Les Hyksos et la légende d'Io. Recherches sur la période mycénienne
in: Syria n°29:1 (1952) pp. 1-43.
BCE and Danaos would leave Egypt in 1511 BCE. According to Eusebius the departure
from Egypt led by Moses would have happened in 1530 BCE. Danaos would be expelled
from Egypt and founded Argos in 1495 BCE, Cadmus would reigned at Tyr in 1475 BCE
then in Thebes from 1450 BCE. Historian Paul Orosius (c. 417 CE) dated the arrival of
Cadmus in Thebes 775 years before the founding of Rome, i.e. in 1528 BCE (History
against the Pagans I:11:1-I:12:7). These chronological data are consistent to situate Cadmus
(and Moses) around -1500 +/- 40. According to these historians, Cadmus would be an
oriental who fled Phoenicia after the conquest of Canaan (starting after the 40 years of
Exodus led by Moses in the Sinai) and would had settled in Boeotia, while Danaos had fled
directly from Egypt shortly afterward and would had settled in Argos. All these historical
accounts are rejected by archaeologists despite their consistency and seniority. However,
epigraphic studies216, even if they are little documented217, tend to confirm218 more and
more the testimony of early historians. Elements on the evolution of language are also
relevant because the Greek alphabet was inspired by the Phoenician alphabet, itself adapted
from Egyptian hieroglyphs219. Thus, paleo-Hebrew writing had to appear around 1500
BCE, instead of 1200 BCE, and Greek writing around 1050 BCE, instead of 750 BCE.
WHEN WAS WRITTEN THE PENTATEUCH?

Most modern Biblical scholars220 believe that written books were a product of the
Babylonian exilic period (c. 600 BCE) and that it was completed by the Persian period (c.
400 BCE). This belief has no serious scientific foundation, it is in fact based on ideological,
linguistic and historical presuppositions. These minimalist scholars221 (no archaeological
evidence = no historical existence) suppose, for example, that the Jews invented their
biblical literature during the Babylonian exile to legitimize "founding myths of Zionism".
This supposition is in fact the result of atheist activism, it is only a disguised propaganda.
Arguments based on linguistic and historical evidence is in fact of archaeological type
"absence of evidence is evidence of absence". Indeed, the books belonging to a early
religious order and in a language incomprehensible to Greek historians have left no
historical evidence outside their country of origin. Our ignorance resulting from an absence
of evidence, however it is obvious that the origin of these books is very old as the Vedas
(or the biblical books). Even the famous works of Homer, the best known of the Greek
world, are quoted only from the time of the tyrant Pisistratus222 (550 BCE) about 300 years
after its creation. Thus the dating thanks to quotations is not reliable.
The dating by linguistic criteria is also misleading because it implicitly transforms
our ignorance of history in (wrong) evidence, because of the very limited corpus on which
216 J.G. FÉVRIER – Histoire de l'écriture
Paris 1984 Éd. Payot pp. 179-201, 384-397.
217 J.-P. OLIVIER - Les écritures syllabiques égéennes et leur diffusion en Egypte au premier millénaire avant notre ère
in: Actes du premier forum international du Centre de Calligraphie de la Bibliotheca Alexandrina, (24-27 avril 2003) pp. 167-181.
218 J.F. HEALEY – Premières tentatives d'écritures alphabétiques
in: La naissance des écritures du cunéiforme à l'alphabet (1994 Éd. Seuil) pp. 267-297.
C.J. RUIJGH – Sur la date de la création de l'alphabet Grec
in: Mnemosyne vol. 51:6 (1998) pp. 658-687.
A. LEMAIRE – Les «Hyksos» et les débuts de l'écriture alphabétique au Proche-Orient
in: Des signes pictographiques à l'alphabet (Karthala, 2000) pp.103-133.
H. LA MARLE – L'aventure de l'alphabet
Paris 2000 Ed. Librairie P. Geuthner pp. 57-94, 161-163
219 G.J. H AMILTON – W.F. Albright and Early Alphabetic Epigraphy
in: Near Eastern Archaeology vol 65:1 (2002) pp. 35-42.

220 J. BLENKINSOPP – The Pentateuch: An introduction to the first five books of the Bible
New York 1992 Ed. Doubleday (Anchor Bible Reference Library) p. 1.

221 J. DAY – In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel
New York 2004 Ed. T&T Clark International p. 24.

222 E. LASSERRE - Iliade
Paris 2000 Éd. GF Flammarion pp. 1,22.

it operates. Rare words of the Bible were often supposed late, and therefore anachronistic.
For example, in a reference dictionary223 (in 1951), the words ketem "gold" (Job 28:16,19),
pardes "park" (Song of Solomon 4:13; Ecclesiastes 2:5, Nehemiah 2:8) and karoz "herald"
(Daniel 3:4) were supposed late and borrowed from Greek around 400 BCE (i.e. paradeisos
"paradise"; kerux "herald"). According to a later dictionary224 (2000) these rare (and
therefore poorly known) words already existed in Akkadian: kutîmu from the Sumerian KU-
225
DIM "goldsmith" (prior 2000 BCE), pardêsu "enclosure" from the Old Persian pari-dîdâ
"wall around" (c. 600 BCE) and kirenzi "proclamation" which would be borrowed from
Hurrian language (c. 1500 BCE). The assertions of anachronisms are now anachronistic, in
fact they were based on an illusion, the missing words were actually hibernating words226.
Linguistic conclusions are still skewed by the following difficulties:
! Some archaic technical terms have been updated, which generated artificial anachronisms. According
to the Babylonian Talmud (Baba Batra 14b, Sanhedrin 4:7 21b) the biblical text in paleo-
Hebrew character was rewritten in Aramaic by Ezra (around 400 BCE), called now
"square Hebrew". The word "daric" (1Chronicles 29:7), for example, is anachronistic
since this monetary unit, appeared in the 6th century BCE, was unknown at the time of
David four centuries earlier. Ezra, the alleged compiler of the book of Chronicles, has
completed the conversion of an old unit, unusual in his time, into a more familiar: the
"daric", as he did in Ezra 8:27. In contrast, the qesitah (Genesis 33:19, Joshua 24:32, Job
42:11) was not converted by Ezra, but the translators of the Septuagint translated this
unknown exchange value into "lamb". Their translation, otherwise unattested, is perhaps
inspired from an archaic Greek pattern227.
! The geographical areas of the ancient world have changed over time. According to the texts of the
New Testament (Galatians 4:25; Acts 7:29-30) Sinai (northern Egypt) was a mountain in
Arabia. Similarly, the translators of the Septuagint located (c. 280 BCE) the land of
Goshen in Arabia (Genesis 45:10, 46:34). There seems to be an anachronism, however,
this definition of Arabia agrees with historians of that time. Thus, Strabo (c. 20 CE), a
Greek geographer, described the borders of Arabia from the Persian Gulf in the east to
the Nile in the West (Geography 16:4:2, 17:1:21-31), which means that for him the
Arabian Peninsula and the Sinai Peninsula were included in Arabia. Similarly, the Greek
historian Herodotus (c. 450 BCE) called Arabia the entire region from east of the Nile
to the Red Sea (The Histories 2:8,15,19,30,75,124,158). Arabia in the Septuagint and
New Testament is therefore different from that of the Old Testament (which
corresponds to the present definition), but was consistent with that of the Greek
geographers of their respective eras.
! The relationship between ethnicity and geographical area have changed. The precision "Ur of the
Chaldeans" (Genesis 11:28,31; 15:7) at the time of Abraham, for example, is considered
anachronistic because the Chaldeans appear only 1000 years later. Chaldea refers to a
region in the south of Babylonia. The Septuagint translated the phrase "Ur of the
Chaldeans" as "country of the Chaldeans," which refers to a geographical area, not to an
ethnic area. According to Strabo, a Greek geographer: In Babylonia a settlement is set apart
223 F. BROWN, S.R. DRIVER, C.A. BRIGGS – A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament
Oxford 1951 Ed. Oxford University pp. 508, 825, 1097.
224 J. BLACK, A. GEORGE, N. POSTGATE – A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian
Wiesbaden 2000 Ed.Harrassowitz Verlag pp. 159, 171, 266.

225 The Old Persian word pari-dîdâ "wall around" would come from the Mede word pari-daiza. Mede language has been spoken in
Ecbatana back to 1000 BCE (F. JOANNÈS – Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne, 2001 Robet Laffont, p. 517).
226 A.R. MILLARD - The Tell Fekheriyeh Inscriptions
in: Biblical Archaeology Today 1990. Jerusalem 1993, Ed. Israel Exploration Society p. 523
A.R. MILLARD - A Lexical Illusion
in: Journal of Semitic Studies 31 (1986) pp. 1-3.
227 At the time of the Trojan War, a slave, for example, was worth four oxen and a tripod 12 oxen (Iliad XXIII:703-705).
for the local philosophers, the Chaldaeans, as they are called, who are concerned mostly with astronomy;
but some of these, who are not approved of by the others, profess to be astrologers. There is also a tribe of
the Chaldaeans, and a territory inhabited by them, in the neighbourhood of the Arabians and of the
Persian Sea, as it is called. There are also several tribes of the Chaldaean astronomers. For example,
some are called Urukeans, others Borsippeans, and several others by different names (Geography
XVI:1:6). The location of the Chaldeans is related to a profession not an ethnic group.
Herodotus described the Chaldeans as priests-astronomers and not as an ethnic group
apart (The Histories I:181,183). The Greek word kaldaiôn "Chaldeans" comes from the
Assyrian kaldu which comes from the Old Babylonian ka"du228 prior to 1400 BCE229.
However, the Hebrew word "Chaldeans" in the Bible is not kaldu but ka"dim which
corresponds to ka"du. This word comes from ki""atu, which meant both "Entirety" and
"Kishite". The Chaldeans are relatively poorly known. It is in an inscription of
Ashurbanipal II they appear for the first time in 872 BCE. If Chaldeans are found in
some major Babylonian cities (Sippar, Kuta, Ki", Nippur, Uruk), their privileged
dwelling place seems to have been southern Babylonia and the land of marshes230. The
term "Ur of the Chaldeans" therefore means "Ur in Chaldea," the Chaldeans (Ka"dim)
being the inhabitants south of Shinar (Sumer) called the "people of Sealand" by
Babylonian scribes. The kings of Sealand constantly claimed their connecting to the
ancient kingdom of Ki"231, as did King Ayadaragalama (1498-1482) calling himself232:
"anu (MAN) ki""ati (!Ú) "viceroy of the Ki""atum (entirety)", which can be translated into
Hebrew: "king of the Ka"dim". Chaldea and Sumer (Shinar)233 are merely geographical
designations because despite the land of his birth was Chaldea, Abraham was not a
Chaldean. Similarly, although he lived in the land of Sumer he was not a Sumerian.
When Abraham resided in Canaan, then in Egypt, he is qualified as Aramean (A’amu)
because he was a nomad of Aramaic language (close to Hebrew at that time). He was in
fact a son of Eber, that is a Hebrew (Genesis 10:21; 14:13). The word ‘eber means "to
pass-over" in Hebrew234 or "to cross over (eberum)/ migrant" in Babylonian235.
Epigraphic dating includes a significant part of interpretation, and therefore of
subjectivity, which explains the multitude of opinions and "chapels" on these issues236. If
the dating based on the absence of certain words is not reliable it can give interesting
results if it is based, on the contrary, on the presence of (loan) words that no longer prevail.
It is known that the West Semitic language was widespread in Egypt prior to 1800 BCE237
(the pyramid of Unas already contains, c. 2300 BCE, phrases in Old Canaanite written
phonetically in hieroglyphics238). The word !anîkîm in Genesis 14:14 is an example stating
228 J. BLACK, A. GEORGE, N. POSTGATE – A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian
Wiesbaden 2000 Ed.Harrassowitz Verlag pp. 152, 162.
229 A.F. RAINEY – Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets
Atlanta 1996 Ed. Society of Biblical Literature pp. 41-42.

230 F. JOANNÈS – Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne
Paris 2001 Éd. Robet Laffont pp. 175-176, 448-449.

231 N. YOFFEE - Towards a Biography of Kish: Notes on Urbanism and Comparison
in: Literature as Politics, Politics as Literature (Eisenbrauns, 2013) pp. 527-544.

232 S. DALLEY – Gods from north-eastern and north-western Arabia in cuneiform texts from the First Sealand Dynasty (...) c. 1500 BC
in: Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 24:2 (2013) pp. 177-185

233 The native designations for the "land of Sumer" are kingir (written KI.EN.GI) in Sumerian and "mat "umerim" (translation) in Akkadian
or "an!ar (transcription). This toponym has been transcribed: "an!ar (Hittite), tngr (Ugaritic), s-n-g-r (Egyptian), "in’ar (Hebrew).
234 Abraham "passed over" the Euphates, Moses "passed over" the Red Sea and Jesus "passed over" the Jordan River.
235 J.M. DURAND - Documents épistolaires du palais de Mari
in: LIPO n°18 (Paris 2000 Éd. Cerf) p. 205.

236 P. GUILLEMETTE M. BRISEBOIS - Introduction aux méthodes historico-critiques .
In: Héritage et projet n°35. Québec 1987 Ed.Fides pp. 225-227.

237 J.E. HOCH – Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period (Princeton 1994 Ed. Princeton
University Press pp. 449-486). The word migdol (Exodus 14:2), for example, magdalu in Old Canaanite (EA 234), appeared in Egyptian c.
1800 BCE (J. SEGUIN – Le Migdol du Proche-Orient à l'Égypte, Paris 2007, Éd. Presses de l'Université Paris-Sorbonne pp. 28-30,149).
238 R.C. STEINER – Early Northwest Semitic Serpent Spells in the Pyramid Texts
in: Harvard Semitic Studies 61. Indiana 2011, pp. 77-84.

the great antiquity of the biblical text. This hapax, which nobody knew the exact meaning
("trained men" by guessing), was discovered in Egyptian execration texts dated 1900-1800
for qualifying some "armed partisans" among Canaanite princes. This rare word239 then
appears for the last time in a text found in Taanach dated 1500-1400. How a late writer of
the biblical text could he know a word disappeared since 1400 BCE? The simplest
explanation of this astonishing accuracy is it not to admit that the author of the text has
lived at the time of the facts? As the well-known word manna "what? (Exodus 16:15)" is
different from the Hebrew mâ hû‘ "what's it" some linguists have explained this discrepancy
by a popular etymology based on Old Syriac or late Aramaic. This erudite explanation is
incorrect because in both languages the words man-hû‘ mean "who that" (Daniel 3:15) not
"what". The form of interrogative pronouns in ancient Semitic languages240 is as follows:
Language From To "Who" "What" "Tower"
Old Egyptian -2500 -1500 m m m(i)-k-ti-l
Old Akkadian -2500 -2000 man min
Assyro-Babylonian -1900 -600 mannu(m) mînu(m)
Amorite -2500 -1500 manna ma
Ugaritic -1500 -1100 my mh, mn mgdl
Old Canaanite (/Old Hebrew) -1800 -1100 miya manna magdalu
Phoenician -1000 300 my m
Hebrew -1000 500 mî mâ migdol
Aramaic -900 200 man mâ
Old Syriac 0 200 man mâ
The word mannu existed in old Canaanite and meant "what's that" in El-Amarna
letters (c. 1350 BCE) as nominative form (EA 96:14) or accusative form manna "of what"
(EA 286:5). This vocalization is preserved by the Septuagint and the New Testament. Old
Canaanite is a kind of Hebrew tinged with Akkadian241 which was used by Semitic scribes
in their correspondence (Old Canaanite was replaced by Hebrew after 1100 BCE).
Dating ancient texts by linguistic and epigraphic data is an extremely difficult
exercise because the corpus of ancient documents is very limited or nonexistent. Usually
the date of writing of a book is determined by the last event mentioned which can be dated
historically. This method of dating is considered as the only reliable one. For example, the
book of Flavius Josephus entitled: Jewish Antiquities was written in Aramaic before being
translated into Greek (Jewish War 1:3), but no writing of Josephus in Aramaic has been
found and the oldest Greek writing appears almost 10 centuries after the original. The
oldest evidence of this book is actually a Latin manuscript of the 6th century242. Thus,
despite the widespread diffusion of Josephus' book, since its edition has been supported by
the imperial administration, the initial version in Aramaic can not be found and the oldest
Greek copies are dated 11th century. In fact this venerable book is dated 94 CE thanks to
the mention of the death of Agrippa II, which can be dated 93 CE. If one applies this
method to the Pentateuch its dating is based on two well identified events in the biblical
account: 1) Moses wrote his book at the end of the exodus, 40 years after the death of
Pharaoh and 2) 1 year prior to entering the promised land and the destruction of Jericho by
fire. In addition the death of the anonymous pharaoh is precisely dated May 10, 1533 BCE.
Paris 1986 Éd. Gabalda pp. 208-209.
in: Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 80. Leuven 2001 Ed. Peeters pp. 336-337,560,575.
241 S. IZRE'EL - Canaano-Akkadian
Munich 2005 Ed. Licom Europa pp. 1-4.

242 É. NODET - Les Antiquités juives. Livres I à III
Paris 1992 Éd. Cerf pp. VII-XV.

As Moses' name does not appear in any Egyptian document and the pharaoh of the
Exodus is not named in the Bible, archaeologists conclude (obviously) that this major event
can not be identified. This conclusion is staggering for two reasons 1) Manetho clearly
states that Moses used his nickname only after his entering Palestine, prior he was called
Osarsiph (Aauserre-Apopi) and 2) the biblical text provides many details which can be
easily identified in Egyptian records, as (see Dating the War of the Hyksos):
According to the biblical account According to Egyptian accounts
A Hebrew baby "very pretty (yepepiah)" is adopted by A Hyksos (Semitic prince) named Apopi reigned 40
Pharaoh's daughter who gave him the Egyptian years in Egypt from 1613 to 1573 BCE. He was the
nickname Musa. This young Hebrew is established as last king (Aauserre) of the XVth dynasty and was the
prince in Egypt for 40 years from 1613 to 1573 BCE. only Hyksos receiving the title "Pharaoh" (nesu bity).
After spending 40 years in Midian, that former About 40 years later the former pharaoh Apopi met
Egyptian ruler came back to Egypt and met an Seqenenre Taa the last pharaoh of the XVIIth dynasty
anonymous Pharaoh to inform him the departure of and gave him an unspecified disturbing message. The
the Hebrews in Palestine and the death of all the eldest son of Seqenenre Taa, Ahmose Sapaïr, who
firstborn at the time of the Passover including his was crown prince died in a dramatic and unexplained
eldest son, who was crown prince. way shortly before his father.
One month after the Passover the anonymous After their massive departure into Palestine the
Pharaoh tryied catching up the Hebrews with his Hyksos disappeared Egypt definitively. Pharaoh
chariots of war to force them returning into Egypt, Seqenenre Taa died in May 1533 BCE, after 11 years
but he died in the Red Sea with his whole army, May of reign, in dramatic and unclear circumstances. The
10, 1533 BCE during a solar eclipse. state of his mummy proves, however, that his body
received severe injuries and remained abandoned for
several days before being mummified.
The Hebrews began their stay in Sinai and tried to Prince Kamose, Seqenenre Taa's brother, assured
enter by force in Canaan but were repulsed by the interim of authority for 3 years and threatened attack
Amalekites. Then they will spend 40 years in the the former pharaoh Apopi, new prince of Retenu
Sinai desert before returning permanently in Canaan. (Palestine). In the stele of the Tempest he also
blames him for all the disasters that come to fall
upon Egypt which caused many deaths.
At the end of 40 years of exodus (in 1493 BCE) According to the Carbon 14, the cities of Jericho, Ai,
Moses wrote the Pentateuch under his "given name" and Hazor were burned around 1500 BCE. Hazor
Mu"a and catched a glimpse of the promised land, being the capital of Canaan at that time the only ones
near Jericho, before dying. The following year the able to defeat her were the Hyksos (the Egyptians
Hebrews began the conquest of Canaan burning did not come in this region). The Shasu suddenly
three major cities: Jericho, Ai, and Hazor. appear in Palestine (mentioned for the first time
under Thutmosis I).
The Hebrews settled gradually in Canaan and Queen Hatshepsut wrote (in Speos Artemidos): I
expelled only partly the Canaanites. The period of restored what have been devastated, I levied the foremost draft
the Judges begins with Joshua. since Asiatics were in the region of Avaris of Lower Egypt.
Resident aliens among them were disregarding the assigned
tasks. They ruled without Re‘ (...) I have banished the
abomination of the gods, the earth removed their footprints!
Thanks to previous data (accurate and verifiable), the books of Moses have had to
be written around 1500 BCE. However, although some biblical scholars recognize that the
historic core of the Pentateuch could be authentic they assume that it have been
transmitted orally until its writing from 900 BCE, 600 years later. Although this diplomatic
compromise allows them not to annoy archaeologists, it is unlikely. Indeed, for some
historical situations very complex it would have been impossible to transmit them without
a written medium. Biblical scholars then pleaded exceptional memory of men of the past,
but this argument comes under the mythology because those who were endowed with such
storage capacities always did it from writing (as poetry recitation) and not from an oral
transmission (grapevine!). In addition why and for whom these prodigious transmitters
would they achieved such a feat (and for how long)? For example, when Herodotus wanted
writing an accurate biography of Cyrus, only 80 years after his death, he had to choose
from at least three different stories, none of them keeping the exact circumstances of the
death of this well known king. This example shows the unreliability of oral transmission, as
Herodotus himself reminds (The Histories I:5, VII:152). It is always difficult to keep a lot
of information unique and complex as shown also in the following example: to resist the
Assyrian expansionism Pekah the king of Israel was allied with Rezin the king of Syria
(Damascus), but in vain (2Kings 16:5-9), because the regions of Galilee and Gilead, which
previously had been recaptured in part by Jeroboam II (2 Kings 14:25), were finally
annexed by Tiglath-pileser III (2Kings 15:29) with the participation of the fierce king of
Edom (Amos 1:13-15) and Shalman the king of Moab, devastating the Gileadite city of
Beth-Arbel (Hosea 10:14 ), the modern Irbid. This powerful coalition (Edom, Moab,
Ammon, Philistia, Tyre, Assyria) left a painful memory (Psalms 83:4-8). The chronological
agreement among all these characters is remarkable. Ahaz king of Judah (742-726),
Jeroboam II King of Israel (823-782), Hosea governor (738-729) then king of Israel (729-
720), Pekah king of Israel (758-738), Qa'ushmalaka king of Edom (760-732), Rezin king of
Syria (750-732), Shalman king of Moab (740-720), Tiglath-pileser III king of Assyria (745-
727) and Babylon (729-727). All these historical, geographical and chronological details
regarding many kingdoms, whose situations were extremely complex and changing, prove
that the writing of the biblical text had to be done at the time of the facts. In addition, their
complexity involved a long report (1Chronicles 9:1; 2Chronicles 16:11) which excluded
limited supports as clay tablets.
Some details provide information that can be compared with fingerprints. Four
chronological markers (datable elements but insignificant at the time of writing) allow
dating an event: 1) the rate of inflation in the price of a slave, 2) the proportion of certain
names in documents, 3) the structure in treaties and 4) the type of calendars used.
DATING EVENTS BY CHRONOLOGICAL MARKERS
1) The price of a slave changed, it has increased over time243 in line with inflation
(complex variation with fluctuations up to 50% depending on cities and time)244. It is 10-15
shekels in Akkad (2200 BCE), 10 shekels in Ur III (2000 BCE), 20 shekels in the code of
Hammurabi and Mari (1700 BCE), 30 shekels in Nuzi (1400 BCE), between 20 and 40
shekels in Ugarit (1300 BCE), 50 to 60 shekels in Assyria (900-800), and between 90 and
120 shekels at the beginning of the Persian period (600-500).
243 E.M. BLAIKLOCK - The New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology

Michigan 1983 Ed. Zondervan Publishing House p. 417.
P. GARELLI, J.M. DURAND, H. GONNET, C. BRENIQUET - Le Proche-Orient Asiatique
Paris 1997 Éd. P.U.F. pp. 278-288.
244 M. JURSA – Aspect of the Economic History of Babylonia in the First Millenium BC, Ugarit-Verlag
Münster 2010, pp. 232-235, 740-751, 773-816.

The correlation between biblical dating and the period where events are expected to
occur is excellent. The price of 20 shekels set to buy Joseph (aged 17) as a slave (Genesis
37:28) is in agreement with the period when he was sold (1770 BCE) like that of 30 shekels
(Exodus 21:32) with the period when Moses is supposed to have lived (1500 BCE).
Similarly, the price of 50 shekels (2Kings 15:20) corresponds to the period where reigned
Menahem (770 BCE). Finally, the price of 90 shekels245 (3x30) is deduced from the text of
Zechariah 11:8,12 (520 BCE).
2) The proportion of Amorite names with a conjugated form in the imperfect
(starting with an i or y) with respect to all names is linked to a specific period. It is obvious
that some names (or first names) are characteristic of a time, which allows dating them. A
study246 over 360 Akkadian names of the 3rd millennium BCE, showed a proportion of 20%
of names in the imperfect, 80% starting with y/i. Another study247 involving 6000 names
showed that near 1800 BCE there were 16% in the imperfect, 55% starting with y/i.
Around 1300 BCE among 4050 names only 2% were in the imperfect, 30% starting with
y/i. At the beginning of the 1st millennium BCE among 5000 names, it remained only
0.25% in the imperfect, of which 1.6% starting with y/i:
In chapters 16-50 of Genesis, 24 Abraham's descendants appear and among them 4

have a name beginning with y/i (Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph), or a proportion of 16%.
The period when these characters lived extends from 2000 to 1750 BCE according to the
Bible, what is actually in very good agreement with the archaeological data. Details of
interest, all the deities whose name starts with y/i are very old, specially before the 2nd
millennium BCE (as Ishtar, It, Igigi, Inanna Ishkur, Ishara, Inshushinak).
3) The structure of treaties is also characteristic of an era. A study248 involving 57
treaties showed that they contained specific parts (witnesses, titles, oaths, stipulations,
curses, blessings, deposit) presented in a sequence characteristic for each era. The Bible
records 3 treaties during the patriarchal era: that of Abraham with Abimelech in Genesis
245 The sum of 30 shekels is accounted for a month's salary and it represented a third of the price of a slave (assuming the ratio of 1/3
was almost constant). A shekel was worth 3 denarii and a denarius corresponded to a day's work in the first century (Matthew 20:2).
246 R.A. DI VITO - Studies in Third Millenium Sumerian and Akkadian Personal Names
Roma 1993 Ed. Pontificio Istituto Biblico pp. 306-317.

J. BRIGHT - A History of Israel
London 1980 ED. SCM pp. 77, 78.
K.A. KITCHEN - Ancient Orient and the Old Testament
Chicago 1966 Ed. IVP pp. 48, 49.
D.J. WISEMAN F.E. GAEBELEIN - Archaeology & The Old Testament
in: Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 1, Grand Rapids 1983 Ed. Zondervan p. 316.
247 K.A. KITCHEN - Ancient Israel. A Short History from Abraham to the Destruction of the Tem.
1989 in: Themelios 15:1 Ed. H. Shanks pp. 25-28.

248 K.A. KITCHEN - The Patriarchal Age: Myth or History
1995 in: Biblical Archaeology Review 21:2 pp. 48-57, 88-95.

K.A. KITCHEN, R.S. HESS - Genesis 12-50 in the Near Eastern World
Cambridge 1993 in: He Swore an Oath Ed. Tyndale House pp. 67-92.
21, that of Isaac with Abimelech in Genesis 26, and that of Jacob with Laban in Genesis
31. These three treaties have the same structure: 1) witnesses (Genesis 21:22; 26:28, 31:44-
52), 2) oath (Genesis 21:23; 26:28, 31:44), 3) stipulations (Genesis 21:24,30; 26:29; 31:52) 4)
curses and blessings (Genesis 21:33; 26:29, 31:53). These three biblical treaties dating from the
patriarchal period, fit exactly with the early 2nd millennium BCE dated thanks to linguistic
and archaeological data from the same place and same time:
-2500 -2000 -1500 -1000
4) Thanks to the development of calendar systems used in Palestine it is also

possible to date some biblical events. Ancient calendars were used for example to
determine the maturity of the contracts and also to organize religious celebrations. These
calendars were under the responsibility of a class of priests astronomers. At the early 2nd
millennium BCE there were only two major systems of dating: 1) the Mesopotamian
calendar of Babylonian origin based on a lunar cycle beginning at 1st moon crescent with 12
month names and 2) the Egyptian civil calendar with 12 anonymous months of 30 days
alongside a lunar calendar starting at the full moon. The absence of a temple with its
priesthood forced the Israelites to use calendars where they were staying. It is thus possible
to date their wanderings through various calendars they used. According to the biblical text,
the Israelites stayed in Egypt for 215 years from 1748 to 1533 BCE and in Canaan after
that date. The first temple was completed in 997 BCE and destroyed in 587 BCE. The
Israelites deported into Babylon for 50 years (587-537) returned to build the temple which
was functional from 517 BCE and calendar months have been translated through their
Babylonian equivalent. Babylonian calendar was gradually established in the whole western
Orient. The city of Alalakh249, for example, adopted it about 1500 BCE. This calendar was
also used in Palestine but the name of months was Canaanite250 at that time:
249 M.E. COHEN – The Cultic Calendars of the Ancient Near East
maryland 1993 Ed. CDL Press pp. 1-309.
250 J.A. W AGENAAR - Post-Exilic Calendar Innovations
in: Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 115 (2003) pp. 1-24.
MESOPOTAMIAN n° Season CANAANITE JULIAN

I Nisannu 7 1 Spring equinox Abib (Dt 16:1) March/April
II Ayaru 8 2 Ziw (1K 6:1) April/May
III Simanu 9 3 Matan May/June
IV Du'uzu 10 4 Summer solstice Zeba( !ama" June/July
V Abu 11 5 Kiraru July/August
VI Ululu [second] 12 6 Mapa‘a [Lepaniya] August/September
VII Tashritu 1 7 Autumn equinox Ethanim (1K 8:2) September/October
VIII Arahsamnu 2 8 Bul (1K 6:38) October/November
IX Kisilimu 3 9 Marpa‘a(m) November/December
X Tebetu 4 10 Winter solstice Pagruma December/January
XI Shabatu 5 11 Pa‘alatu January/February
XII Addaru 6 12 %iyaru February/March
The Canaanite calendar was used in Phoenicia up to the 6th century BCE251. After
the fall of Babylon, Jews of Judea adopted the Babylonian calendar, however their former
religious calendar with its anonymous months was always favored. The names of
Babylonian months were used to reflect the rank of Jewish months: In the 4th year of King
Darius, the word of Yahweh was addressed to Zechariah on the 4th [day] of the 9th month, in Chislev
(Zechariah 7:1). This system of Babylonian origin used the names of Aramaic months252:
n° BABYLONIAN OLD PERSIAN PALMYRIAN ARAMAIC JULIAN

1 Nisannu Âdukanai"a Nisan Nisan (Est 3:7) March/April
2 Ayaru "ûravâhara Iyar Iyyar April/May
3 Simanu "âigar#i Siwan Siwan (Est 8:9) May/June
4 Du'uzu Garmapada Quenian Tammuz June/July
5 Abu "ûrnabax"i Ab Ab July/August
6 Ululu Garmabax"i Elul Elul (Ne 6:15) August/September
7 Tashritu Bâgayâdi Tishri Tishri September/October
8 Arahsamnu Vrkazada Kanun [Mar]heshwan October/November
9 Kisilimu Âçiyâdiya Kislul Kislew (Zc 7:1) November/December
10 Tebetu Anâmaka Tebe# Tebeth (Est 2:16) December/January
11 Shabatu Zamimâ Shebet Shebat (Zc 1:7) January/February
12 Addaru Viyaxna Adar Adar (Ezr 6:15) February/March
The biblical text uses the two words yera" and hode" to designate lunar months. The
word hode", used to designate the new moon, comes from hada" "new" (as in the name
Carthage, Kart-hade"t "new city") and means "renewal", hence its meaning "new [moon]".
The word yera" "month" comes from the word yarea" "moon" and can be translated as
"lunation". The word "full moon" (Proverbs 7:20) is kese or lebanah "the white one" (Isaiah
30:26). Both words hode" and yera" used in the sense of "months" are not synonymous since
Canaanite inscriptions253 found with the words hode" yera" ethanim which can be translated
as: new lunation of Ethanim (1Kings 8:2). If the two words were synonymous the translation
would be: month of month of Ethanim! This semantic nuance is important because in a lunar
calendar beginning on the new moon, the two words "new [moon]" and "lunation" to
designate a month may agree, but in a calendar starting at the full moon, lunation is the
251 R.R. STIEGLITZ -The Phoenician-Punic Menology
in: Boundaries of the Ancient Near Eastern World (Sheffield Academic Prsess, 1998) pp. 211–222.
252 K. BUTCHER –Roman Syria and the Near East
London 2003 Ed. The British Museum Press pp. 125-126.

253 H. DONNER, W. RÖLLING - Kanaanäische und Aramäische Inschriften
Wiesbaden 2002 Ed. Harrassowitzp. 9 N°3.

only appropriate word. Archaeology shows that the Jews of Judea used only the word hode"
"new [moon]" to designate month, whereas that the Jews of Egypt used only the word yera"
"lunation"254. We read, for example, on the ostracon of Arad n°7 (c. 600 BCE): to the 10th
[month], the 1st of the month to the 6th of the month255. Upon entering Canaan, the Israelites used
the Canaanite calendar, the 1st (anonymous) month of their calendar becoming Abib. The
Canaanites used the word yera" refering to "month", that could be ambiguous for the
Israelites because this term designated also a "month" starting at the full moon as in Egypt
(the Jews of Elephantine have continued using yera"). The term hode" "month" starting at
the 1st moon crescent (as in Syria) was so privileged in Palestine from 1000 BCE. Placing
months according to chronology, we obtain the following changes in biblical calendars:
BIBLICAL CALENDAR
period event yera" hode" month name reference
-3000 [X] X numbered Genesis 7:11; 8:4,13,14; 10:26
1800-1700 Stay in Egypt X X [numbered] Job 3:6; 7:3; 14:5; 21:21; 29:2; 39:2
1700-1600 [X] [X] [numbered]
1600-1500 Stay in Midian X [X] [numbered] Exodus 2:2,22
1500-1400 Entry into Canaan X X Canaanite Deuteronomy 21:13, Exode 23:15
1400-1300 [X] X numbered Joshua 4:19
1300-1200 [X] [X] ?
1200-1100 [X] X ? Judges 11:37-39
1100-1000 X X Canaanite 1Kings 6:37,38; 2Kings 8:2; Gezer
1000 - 900 1st Temple and kingdom X numbered 1Kings 12:32
900-800 [X] [numbered]
800-700 X numbered 2Chronicles 30:15
700-609 Egyptian domination [X] [numbered]
609-587 1st Temple destroyed X numbered 2Kings 25:27
587-537 Stay in Babylon [X] Babylonian
537 - 2nd Temple X Babylonian Zechariah 7:1
-330 X Babylonian Esther 2:16
330-100 [X] Babylonian Hellenistic period
-100+100 2nd Temple destroyed X X Babylonian Talmud, Targum
Archaeology has confirmed this chronological scheme256 since the word yera"
appears for the last time in the Gezer calendar dated around 950 BCE257 and the name of
Canaanite months disappeared in Palestine at that time. The "Canaanite" dating in 1Kings
6:1 is therefore in full agreement with the construction of the temple in the early 10th
century BCE. If the scribe who wrote the Book of Kings (Jeremiah) done it from an oral
tradition after the Babylonian exile (537 BCE) he would have used Babylonian months
instead of Canaanite months. In addition the word yera" was used at this time by the Jews
in Egypt instead of hode" in Judea. If the Pentateuch was written about 900 BCE instead of
1500 BCE (as always teach most German biblists)258, the scribes of that time would not
have used the word yera".
254 B. PORTEN A. YARDENI - Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 3
1993 Ed. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities pp. XXXVI.
255 A. LEMAIRE -Inscriptions hébraïques Tome I, Les Ostraca
in: Littératures anciennes du proche orient n°9 Paris 1977 Ed. Cerf pp. 168,231.
256 A. LEMAIRE – Les formules de datations en Palestine au premier millénaire avant J.-C.
in: Proche-Orient ancien, temps vécu, temps pensé (Paris 1998) Éd. J. Maisonneuve pp. 53-82.
257 The style of the inscription of Gezer is very close to the Tel Zayit abecedary dated 950 BCE. For example the letter heth is written
with three horizontal bars instead of two after 950 BCE.

258 C. NIHAN, T. RÖMER –Le débat actuel sur la formation du Pentateuque
in: Introduction à l'Ancien Testament (Labor et Fides, 2009) pp. 158-184.

Dating the Five Books of Moses Through Synchronisms

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dating the Five Books of Moses Through Synchronisms

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dating the Five Books of Moses

New Jersey 2002 Ed. Paulist Press. p. 21.

in: Themelios 22.1 (October 1996) pp. 3–13.

2004 Ed. T&T Clark pp. 74–79.

Winona Lake 2007 Ed. Eisenbrauns.

Chicago 1994 Ed. Moody Press p. 95.

in: Public Archaeology, Vol. 7, No. 2 (Summer 2008) pp. 135-138.

Paris 2007 Éd. Tallandier pp. 22,394,665,684.

New York 1996 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 3-5.

Paris 2004 Éd. Desclée de Brouwer pp. 125-126.

in: Le monde de la Bible n°146 (novembre 2002) pp. 44-45.

in: Historia n°698 (février 2005) p. 59.

in: Historia n°698 (février 2005) pp. 64, 65.

in: Historia n°698 (février 2005) p. 73.

in: Les Cahiers de Science&Vie n°89 (octobre 2005) pp. 6-8.

New York 2001 Ed. The Free Press pp. 36-38.

REASONS TO REJECT THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS

Fallacious reasoning of the Skeptics:

in: Analecta Biblica 103 (1985) Ed. Biblical Institute Press.

1968 Louvain Ed. Institut Orientaliste pp. 109-111.

1974 Louvain Ed. Institut Orientaliste pp. 128, 234.

Eastern Edfu (2150-2100 BCE) Assuan (2200-2100 BCE)

USA 2002 Ed. Human Relations Area Files, Inc p. 257.

Cambridge 2003 Ed. W.B. Eerdmans pp. 338, 339, 640.

in: Kêmi Vol. II (1929) pp. 84-106, pl. IV.

in: Southwestern Journal of Anthropology Vol. 11:3 (1955) pp. 231-245.

in: Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin 42 (1997) pp. 47-54.

Gurna (Iran, 2800-2700 BCE) Abusir el-Meleq (Egypt, 2800-2700 BCE)

Wadi Nasib (Sinaï, c. 1500 BCE) Rifeh (Egypt, 1300-1200 BCE)

Byblos (c. 2000 BCE) Ur (1900-1700 BCE)

2002, in: Le monde de la Bible n°145 pp. 57-59.

in: Zeitschrift für Assyriologie n°98 (2008) pp. 165-194.

Gonur. Iranian Vase (deployed) in silver (2100-2000 BCE)

Syrian seal (1800-1400 BCE) Bactrian camel statue (2300-1700 BCE)

Chicago 1960 Ed. The Oriental Institute p. 2.

in: Langues et cultures anciennes 7, 2007 Bruxelles, Éd. Safran p. 146.

in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 50 (1998) p. 11.

Paris 2005 Éd. Hachette Supérieur p. 199.

in: A Tribute To Gleason Archer. Chicago 1986, Ed. Moody Press

in: Biblical Archaeologist 56 (1993) pp. 180-188.

PHILISTINES IN THE TIME OF ABRAHAM ARE THEY ANACHRONISTIC?

Paris 1978 Éd. France-Empire pp. 117-138, 164-170

in: Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 25 (1939) pp. 30-39.

Leiden 1937 Ed. E.J. Brill pp. 132-133.

Paris 2001 Éd. Robert Laffont pp. 208-210.

in: The Journal of Hellenic Studies Vol. 59 (1939) pp. 138-139.

in: Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology Vol. XC (1991) pp. 325-350.

in: Aegeans in the Theban Tombs (Peeters, 1987) pp. 93-101.

Paris 2005, Éd. GCG, p. 12.

Paris 1999 Éd. La Maison de Vie p. 20.

Paris 2008 Éd. L'Harmattan pp. 22, 103-108, 156-159.

Paris 1995 Éd. Payot & Rivages pp. 107-108.

Paris 1978, Éd. Clio pp. 12-18.

in: Supplément au Cahier Evangile 69 (Cerf 1989) pp. 13-15.

New York 1990 Ed. Doubleday pp. 242.

Leiden 1996 Ed. Brill pp. 9-11.

Paris 1987 Éd. Hachette pp. 37-40, 253-254.

Le Caire 1956 Éd. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale XXXV p. 45.

in: Oxford Journal of Archaeology 20 (2001) pp. 263-283.

Paris 1992 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 292.

Paris 1983 Éd. France-Empire pp. 102-103.

in: Dictionnaire encyclopédique de la Bible (Brépols, 1987) p. 591.